From rohit at ics.uci.edu Wed Apr 2 22:08:24 2003 From: rohit at ics.uci.edu (Rohit Khare) Date: Wed Apr 2 22:09:09 2003 Subject: April Fool's over: FoRK is back...! Message-ID: <200304030608.h3368SjX002489@gremlin.ics.uci.edu> Sorry gang, still repairing. There may be random corruption(!) of the archives because of disk problems. Had to go install a brand new 400GB raid array to take care of the Gulf War II flamefests :-) I also shut down fork-noarchive. If you set the X-No-Archive flags on your own email postings, the mailbot will not add it to the xent pages. Best, Ro From colds at dydax.com Thu Apr 3 01:18:59 2003 From: colds at dydax.com (Chris Olds) Date: Wed Apr 2 22:19:04 2003 Subject: April Fool's over: FoRK is back...! In-Reply-To: <200304030608.h3368SjX002489@gremlin.ics.uci.edu> Message-ID: Woo Hoo! What a shame - the one day of the year most appropriate to FoRK, and xent dies just prior. Who says the universe isn't ironic by nature?* /cco *Why else would normal fusion stop at iron? You think that's an accident? I sure don't, and by what I can tell, I'm part of the atheist wing of this octopus! p.s. First Post! From jskelly at jskelly.com Wed Apr 2 23:55:20 2003 From: jskelly at jskelly.com (JS Kelly) Date: Wed Apr 2 23:56:11 2003 Subject: April Fool's over: FoRK is back...! In-Reply-To: <200304030608.h3368SjX002489@gremlin.ics.uci.edu> Message-ID: ha! fat lot look at how YOU care. I say, LET THEM DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Rohit Khare wrote: > > Sorry gang, still repairing. There may be random corruption(!) of the archives because of disk problems. Had to go install a brand new 400GB raid array to take care of the Gulf War II flamefests :-) > > I also shut down fork-noarchive. If you set the X-No-Archive flags on your own email postings, the mailbot will not add it to the xent pages. > > Best, > Ro > From jskelly at jskelly.com Wed Apr 2 23:56:03 2003 From: jskelly at jskelly.com (JS Kelly) Date: Wed Apr 2 23:57:06 2003 Subject: April Fool's over: FoRK is back...! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: well YOu know the REAL rules -- "the fairest of them all" and all that rot ;) -n On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Chris Olds wrote: > Woo Hoo! What a shame - the one day of the year most appropriate to FoRK, > and xent dies just prior. Who says the universe isn't ironic by nature?* > > /cco > > *Why else would normal fusion stop at iron? You think that's an accident? > I sure don't, and by what I can tell, I'm part of the atheist wing of this > octopus! > > p.s. First Post! > From jskelly at jskelly.com Thu Apr 3 00:57:28 2003 From: jskelly at jskelly.com (JS Kelly) Date: Thu Apr 3 00:58:47 2003 Subject: April Fool's over: FoRK is back...! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: i guess... well, there might be one more question that i might have, but I'm not quite sure. er, *did* you ever detect any change in the weather lately? On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, JS Kelly wrote: > > > well YOu know the REAL rules -- > "the fairest of them all" > > and all that rot ;) > -n > > On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Chris Olds wrote: > > > Woo Hoo! What a shame - the one day of the year most appropriate to FoRK, > > and xent dies just prior. Who says the universe isn't ironic by nature?* > > > > /cco > > > > *Why else would normal fusion stop at iron? You think that's an accident? > > I sure don't, and by what I can tell, I'm part of the atheist wing of this > > octopus! > > > > p.s. First Post! > > > From jskelly at jskelly.com Thu Apr 3 01:23:14 2003 From: jskelly at jskelly.com (JS Kelly) Date: Thu Apr 3 01:24:10 2003 Subject: April Fool's over: FoRK is back...! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: hey! that's it! i knew it! it is, isn't it? yes. yes yes yes -- indeed. i knew it. well, at least -- i thought i did. you know, that puts me into a song i once herd. can i sing it to you? i mean, i -- you might know the words? it goes like this: the ants go marching one by one hurrah hurrah the ants go marching one by one hurrah hurrah the ants go marching one by one the little one stopped to suck his thumb and they all go marching down to the ground to get out of the rain the ants go marching 2 x 2 hurrah, hurrah the ants go marching 2 x 2 hurrah, hurrah the ants go marching 2 x 2 hurrah, hurrah the ants go marching two by two the little one stopped. .. er, not sure if i remember any more. still thinking about it. sorry about that -- this might still take longer than i thought. yet. but then again -- i've certainly waited this long, haven't you? hmn... well... i seem to be game. what do you think about it? On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, JS Kelly wrote: > > > well YOu know the REAL rules -- > "the fairest of them all" > > and all that rot ;) > -n > > On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Chris Olds wrote: > > > Woo Hoo! What a shame - the one day of the year most appropriate to FoRK, > > and xent dies just prior. Who says the universe isn't ironic by nature?* > > > > /cco > > > > *Why else would normal fusion stop at iron? You think that's an accident? > > I sure don't, and by what I can tell, I'm part of the atheist wing of this > > octopus! > > > > p.s. First Post! > > > From jskelly at jskelly.com Thu Apr 3 01:23:48 2003 From: jskelly at jskelly.com (JS Kelly) Date: Thu Apr 3 01:24:41 2003 Subject: April Fool's over: FoRK is back...! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: er, beg pardon? On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, JS Kelly wrote: > > > i guess... > well, there might be one more question that i might have, > but I'm not quite sure. > > er, *did* you ever detect any change in the weather lately? > > > On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, JS Kelly wrote: > > > > > > > well YOu know the REAL rules -- > > "the fairest of them all" > > > > and all that rot ;) > > -n > > > > On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Chris Olds wrote: > > > > > Woo Hoo! What a shame - the one day of the year most appropriate to FoRK, > > > and xent dies just prior. Who says the universe isn't ironic by nature?* > > > > > > /cco > > > > > > *Why else would normal fusion stop at iron? You think that's an accident? > > > I sure don't, and by what I can tell, I'm part of the atheist wing of this > > > octopus! > > > > > > p.s. First Post! > > > > > > From jskelly at jskelly.com Thu Apr 3 01:26:07 2003 From: jskelly at jskelly.com (JS Kelly) Date: Thu Apr 3 01:27:01 2003 Subject: April Fool's over: FoRK is back...! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: hmn. that puts me in mind of a pretty tale i was once told... On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, JS Kelly wrote: > > > i guess... > well, there might be one more question that i might have, > but I'm not quite sure. > > er, *did* you ever detect any change in the weather lately? > > > On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, JS Kelly wrote: > > > > > > > well YOu know the REAL rules -- > > "the fairest of them all" > > > > and all that rot ;) > > -n > > > > On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Chris Olds wrote: > > > > > Woo Hoo! What a shame - the one day of the year most appropriate to FoRK, > > > and xent dies just prior. Who says the universe isn't ironic by nature?* > > > > > > /cco > > > > > > *Why else would normal fusion stop at iron? You think that's an accident? > > > I sure don't, and by what I can tell, I'm part of the atheist wing of this > > > octopus! > > > > > > p.s. First Post! > > > > > > From jskelly at jskelly.com Thu Apr 3 01:27:14 2003 From: jskelly at jskelly.com (JS Kelly) Date: Thu Apr 3 01:27:42 2003 Subject: April Fool's over: FoRK is back...! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: one last thing... any significance to that old saw about the avogadro number? On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, JS Kelly wrote: > > > hey! > that's it! > i knew it! > it is, isn't it? > yes. yes yes yes -- indeed. > i knew it. > well, at least -- i thought i did. > > > you know, that puts me into a song i once herd. > can i sing it to you? i mean, i -- you might know the > words? > > it goes like this: > > the ants go marching one by one hurrah hurrah > the ants go marching one by one hurrah hurrah > the ants go marching one by one the little one stopped to suck his thumb > and they all go marching > down > to the ground > to get out > of the rain > > > the ants go marching 2 x 2 hurrah, hurrah > the ants go marching 2 x 2 hurrah, hurrah > the ants go marching 2 x 2 hurrah, hurrah > the ants go marching two by two the little one stopped. > > .. er, > not sure if i remember any more. > still thinking about it. > > sorry about that -- this might still take longer than i thought. > yet. > > but then again -- i've certainly waited this long, haven't you? > hmn... > > well... > > i seem to be game. what do you think about it? > > On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, JS Kelly wrote: > > > > > > > well YOu know the REAL rules -- > > "the fairest of them all" > > > > and all that rot ;) > > -n > > > > On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Chris Olds wrote: > > > > > Woo Hoo! What a shame - the one day of the year most appropriate to FoRK, > > > and xent dies just prior. Who says the universe isn't ironic by nature?* > > > > > > /cco > > > > > > *Why else would normal fusion stop at iron? You think that's an accident? > > > I sure don't, and by what I can tell, I'm part of the atheist wing of this > > > octopus! > > > > > > p.s. First Post! > > > > > > From joe at barrera.org Thu Apr 3 01:30:17 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Thu Apr 3 01:32:18 2003 Subject: April Fool's over: FoRK is back...! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E8BFF29.9080508@barrera.org> Is there a reason why you're spewing all this crap? JS Kelly wrote: > > one last thing... > any significance to that old saw about the avogadro number? From jskelly at jskelly.com Thu Apr 3 01:40:52 2003 From: jskelly at jskelly.com (JS Kelly) Date: Thu Apr 3 01:41:43 2003 Subject: April Fool's over: FoRK is back...! In-Reply-To: <3E8BFF29.9080508@barrera.org> Message-ID: just had one last thought. there might yet be one more way. sortof impossible, but yet - you never know. you know how things are. that is, you know what "we" always say. right? .. .. that reminds me ofyet another song i once heard. it goes something like this: should i stay or should i go now should i stay or should i go now if i stay there will be .... um. nope. tnot that one. there's something screwy going on. i really thought i almost had it, but i guess that i didnt? do you know what i mean by that? On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Joseph S Barrera III wrote: > Is there a reason why you're spewing all this crap? > > JS Kelly wrote: > > > > one last thing... > > any significance to that old saw about the avogadro number? > > From jskelly at jskelly.com Thu Apr 3 02:20:31 2003 From: jskelly at jskelly.com (JS Kelly) Date: Thu Apr 3 02:21:21 2003 Subject: April Fool's over: FoRK is back...! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: there seems to be some significance to all of this. do any of these names ring a bell? buster brown shoes bust yer collar calormen the land of calormen "shirley" ? On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, JS Kelly wrote: > > > just had one last thought. there might yet be one more way. > sortof impossible, but yet - you never know. > you know how things are. > that is, you know what "we" always say. > right? > > > .. > .. > > > that reminds me ofyet another song i once heard. it goes something like > this: > > should i stay or should i go now > should i stay or should i go now > if i stay there will be .... > um. > > nope. > > tnot that one. > > there's something screwy going on. i really thought i almost had it, but i > guess that i didnt? > > do you know what i mean by that? > > On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Joseph S Barrera III wrote: > > > Is there a reason why you're spewing all this crap? > > > > JS Kelly wrote: > > > > > > one last thing... > > > any significance to that old saw about the avogadro number? > > > > > From anabhan at attglobal.net Thu Apr 3 10:11:30 2003 From: anabhan at attglobal.net (Antoun Nabhan) Date: Thu Apr 3 02:22:21 2003 Subject: An Interview With Saddam Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20030205235208.04d72cb0@pop6.attglobal.net> Feb. 6, 2003 | Following is the transcript of an interview with Saddam Hussein conducted by former British Member of Parliament Tony Benn, as broadcast Tuesday on Britain's Channel 4 television. Benn: I come for one reason only -- to see whether in a talk we can explore, or you can help me to see, what the paths to peace may be. My only reason, I remember the war because I lost a brother. I never want to see another war. There are millions of people all over the world who don't want a war, and by agreeing to this interview, which is very historic for all of us, I hope you will be able to help me, be able to say something to the world that is significant and positive. Saddam: Welcome to Baghdad. You are conscious of the role that Iraqis have set out for themselves, inspired by their own culture, their civilization and their role in human history. This role requires peace in order to prosper and progress. Having said that, the Iraqis are committed to their rights as much as they are committed to the rights of others. Without peace they will be faced with many obstacles that would stop them from fulfilling their human role. Benn: Mr. President, may I ask you some questions? The first is, does Iraq have any weapons of mass destruction? Saddam: Most Iraqi officials have been in power for over 34 years and have experience of dealing with the outside world. Every fair-minded person knows that when Iraqi officials say something, they are trustworthy. A few minutes ago when you asked me if I wanted to look at the questions beforehand; I told you I didn't feel the need so that we don't waste time, and I gave you the freedom to ask me any question directly so that my reply would be direct. This is an opportunity to reach the British people and the forces of peace in the world. There is only one truth and therefore I tell you as I have said on many occasions before that Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction whatsoever. We challenge anyone who claims that we have to bring forward any evidence and present it to public opinion. Benn: I have another, which has been raised: Do you have links with al-Qaida? Saddam: If we had a relationship with al-Qaida and we believed in that relationship, we wouldn't be ashamed to admit it. Therefore, I would like to tell you directly and also through you to anyone who is interested to know that we have no relationship with al-Qaida. Benn: In relation to the inspectors, there appear to be difficulties with inspectors, and I wonder whether there's anything you can tell me about these difficulties and whether you believe they will be cleared up before [chief U.N. weapons inspector] Mr. Hans Blix and [International Atomic Energy Agency head] Mr. El Baradei come back to Baghdad? Saddam: You are aware that every major event must encounter some difficulty. On the subject of the inspectors and the resolutions that deal with Iraq you must have been following it and you must have a view and a vision as to whether these resolutions have any basis in international law. Nevertheless the Security Council produced them. These resolutions -- implemented or not -- or the motivation behind these resolutions could lead the current situation to the path of peace or war. Therefore it's a critical situation. Let us also remember the unjust suffering of the Iraqi people. For the last 13 years since the blockade was imposed, you must be aware of the amount of harm that it has caused the Iraqi people, particularly the children and the elderly as a result of the shortage of food and medicine and other aspects of their life. Therefore we are facing a critical situation. On that basis, it is not surprising that there might be complaints relating to the small details of the inspection which may be essential issues as far as we are concerned and the way we see the whole thing. It is possible that those Iraqis who are involved with the inspection might complain about the conduct of the inspectors and they complain indeed. It is also possible that some inspectors either for reasons of practical and detailed procedure, or for some other motives, may complain about the Iraqi conduct. Every fair-minded person knows that as far as Resolution 1441 [authorizing U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq] is concerned, the Iraqis have been fulfilling their obligations under the resolution. When Iraq objects to the conduct of those implementing the Security Council resolutions, that doesn't mean that Iraq wishes to push things to confrontation. Iraq has no interest in war. No Iraqi official or ordinary citizen has expressed a wish to go to war. The question should be directed at the other side. Are they looking for a pretext so they could justify war against Iraq? If the purpose was to make sure that Iraq is free of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons then they can do that. These weapons do not come in small pills that you can hide in your pocket. These are weapons of mass destruction and it is easy to work out if Iraq has them or not. We have said many times before and we say it again today that Iraq is free of such weapons. So when Iraq objects to the conduct of the inspection teams or others, that doesn't mean that Iraq is interested in putting obstacles before them which could hinder the efforts to get to the truth. It is in our interest to facilitate their mission to find the truth. The question is does the other side want to get to the same conclusion or are they looking for a pretext for aggression? If those concerned prefer aggression then it's within their reach. The superpowers can create a pretext any day to claim that Iraq is not implementing Resolution 1441. They have claimed before that Iraq did not implement the previous resolutions. However, after many years it became clear that Iraq had complied with these resolutions. Otherwise, why are they focusing now on the latest resolution and not the previous ones? Benn: May I broaden the question out, Mr. President, to the relations between Iraq and the U.N., and the prospects for peace more broadly, and I wonder whether with all its weaknesses and all the difficulties, whether you see a way in which the U.N. can reach that objective for the benefit of humanity? Saddam: The point you raised can be found in the United Nations charter. As you know Iraq is one of the founders and first signatories of the charter. If we look at the representatives of two superpowers -- America and Britain -- and look at their conduct and their language, we would notice that they are more motivated by war than their responsibility for peace. And when they talk about peace all they do is accuse others they wish to destroy in the name of peace. They claim they are looking after the interests of their people. You know as well as I do that this is not the truth. Yes, the world would respect this principle if it was genuinely applied. It's not about power but it is about right and wrong, about when we base our human relations on good, and respect this principle. So it becomes simple to adhere to this principle because anyone who violates it will be exposed to public opinion. Benn: There are people who believe this present conflict is about oil, and I wonder if you could say something about how you see the enormous oil reserves of Iraq being developed, first for the benefit of the people of Iraq and secondly for the needs of mankind. Saddam: When we speak about oil in this part of the world -- we are an integral part of the world -- we have to deal with others in all aspects of life, economic as well as social, technical, scientific and other areas. It seems that the authorities in the U.S. are motivated by aggression that has been evident for more than a decade against the region. The first factor is the role of those influential people in the decision taken by the president of the U.S. based on sympathy with the Zionist entity that was created at the expense of Palestine and its people and their humanity. These people force the hand of the American administration by claiming that the Arabs pose a danger to Israel, without remembering their obligation to God and how the Palestinian people were driven out of their homeland. The consecutive American administrations were led down a path of hostility against the people of this region, including our own nation and we are part of it. Those people and others have been telling the various U.S. administrations, especially the current one, that if you want to control the world you need to control the oil. Therefore the destruction of Iraq is a prerequisite to controlling oil. That means the destruction of the Iraqi national identity, since the Iraqis are committed to their principles and rights according to international law and the U.N. charter. It seems that this argument has appealed to some U.S. administrations, especially the current one, that if they control the oil in the Middle East they would be able to control the world. They could dictate to China the size of its economic growth and interfere in its education system and could do the same to Germany and France and perhaps to Russia and Japan. They might even tell the same to Britain if its oil doesn't satisfy its domestic consumption. It seems to me that this hostility is a trademark of the current U.S. administration and is based on its wish to control the world and spread its hegemony. People have the right to say that if this aggression by the American administration continues, it would lead to widespread enmity and resistance. We won't be able to develop the oil fields or the oil industry and therefore create worldwide cooperation as members of the human family when there is war, destruction and death. Isn't it reasonable to question this approach and conclude that this road will not benefit anyone, including America or its people? It may serve some short-term interests or the interests of some influential powers in the U.S. but we can't claim that it serves the interest of the American people in the long run or other nations. Benn: There are tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions of people in Britain and America, in Europe and worldwide, who want to see a peaceful outcome to this problem, and they are the real Americans in my opinion, the real British, the real French, the real Germans, because they think of the world in terms of their children. I have 10 grandchildren and in my family there is English, Scottish, American, French, Irish, Jewish and Indian blood, and for me politics is about their future, their survival. And I wonder whether you could say something yourself directly through this interview to the peace movement of the world that might help to advance the cause they have in mind? Saddam: First of all we admire the development of the peace movement around the world in the last few years. We pray to God to empower all those working against war and for the cause of peace and security based on just peace for all. And through you we say to the British people that Iraqis do not hate the British people. Before 1991 Iraq and Britain had a normal relationship as well as normal relations with America. At that time the British governments had no reason to criticize Iraq as we hear some voices doing these days. We hope the British people would tell those who hate the Iraqis and wish them harm that there is no reason to justify this war and please tell them that I say to you because the British people are brave -- tell them that the Iraqis are brave too. Tell the British people if the Iraqis are subjected to aggression or humiliation they would fight bravely, just as the British people did in the Second World War, and we will defend our country as they defended their country each in its own way. The Iraqis don't wish war but if war is imposed upon them -- if they are attacked and insulted -- they will defend themselves. They will defend their country, their sovereignty and their security. salon.com From anabhan at attglobal.net Thu Apr 3 10:34:17 2003 From: anabhan at attglobal.net (Antoun Nabhan) Date: Thu Apr 3 02:34:43 2003 Subject: Election bright spot In-Reply-To: <20021106160936.81973.qmail@web14002.mail.yahoo.com> References: <3DC922F5.9050705@blws.org> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20021106094158.02700d00@pop5.attglobal.net> >San Francisco voters approved a measure Tuesday to have the city study >growing and dispensing marijuana for medical purposes in response to >federal crackdowns on medical-cannabis clubs. > >The measure directs city officials such as the mayor, supervisors, >district attorney, city attorney and public health chief to look at >everything from where pot could be grown, how to distribute it and the >liability." We also won Proposition F, which the San Francisco Late-Night Coalition got on the ballot. It changes the composition of the Entertainment Board in a way that should make it harder for the cops to hassle nightclub owners and party sponsors. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lair.xent.com/pipermail/fork/attachments/20030403/99f53221/attachment.htm From fboyle at law.uiuc.edu Thu Apr 3 10:34:16 2003 From: fboyle at law.uiuc.edu (Francis Boyle) Date: Thu Apr 3 02:42:16 2003 Subject: [irtheory] The Boomerang Effect References: Message-ID: <011301c2d5c1$35af98e0$cb59dd0c@insightbb.com> yes, well the National Review is run by Buckley--an admitted CIA Agent. Once CIA, always CIA. fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954(voice) 217-244-1478(fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu (personal comments only) ----- Original Message ----- From: "R. A. Hettinga" To: "Digital Bearer Settlement List" Cc: ; Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 9:29 PM Subject: [irtheory] The Boomerang Effect > > --- begin forwarded text > > > Status: U > Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 15:26:52 -0500 > To: rah@shipwright.com > From: "R. A. Hettinga" > Subject: The Boomerang Effect > > http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/hanson/hanson.asp > > The National Review Online > > Victor Davis Hanson > > February 14, 2003 9 :0 0 a .m. > The Boomerang Effect > Be careful of what you wish for. > > The Security Council is a funny place. I watched the Chinese ambassador grimace at Mr. Powell's speech - and thought of the entire country and hallowed culture of Tibet, now swallowed by his government. Not far away was a functionary from Syria, which has simply absorbed Lebanon. The Russian ambassador voiced pacifist objections too - whose country recently flattened Muslim Grozny. The French dignitary was waving his arms about preventing precipitous unilateral actionS Well, you get the picture. > > Since September 11 we have seen an array of strange developments illustrating the law of unintended consequences. Hypocrisy, irony, and parody - however we wish to characterize these surreal events - at least bring surprising moral clarity and, with it, real wisdom. > > THE U.N. It used to be that some well-intentioned Americans thought the all-wise U.N. should supersede the efforts of the big powers that had once acted unilaterally and without the approval of lesser - and more moral? - states. No longer. Through the efforts of post-Marxists, radical Islamists, anti-Semites, and an array of old-fashioned authoritarians in the General Assembly and the Security Council, the U.N. now unfortunately reflects the aggregate amorality of so many of it members. > > We built the arena, the players came - and, for many Americans, it now seems almost time to leave: Syria on the Security Council; Iran and Iraq overseeing the spread of dangerous weapons; Libya a caretaker of human rights. How about a simple law to preserve a once hallowed institution: To join the U.N.'s democratic assembly, a country must first be democratic? Why should a U.N. diplomat be allowed to demand from foreigners the very privileges that his government denies to its own people? > > The more pictures television brings us of world citizenship at the U.N., the more frightening becomes the entire idea of being subject in any way to approval from anyone like the Husseins, Assads, Qaddafis, Mugabes, mullahs, Chinese Communists, and a whole array of other not very nice people, who either by chance, protocol, or vote have suddenly found themselves very prominent on an assemblage of U.N. boards and committees. > > When I was growing up in rural California, the only people who viscerally distrusted the U.N. were right-wing extremists who also liked to spin conspiracy tales about their drinking water and precious bodily fluids. Yet now - thanks to the macabre nature of so many in the U.N. - their view has proved disturbingly prescient, and threatens to become mainstream among the American people. That took a lot of doing on the part of the General Assembly and Security Council. > > NOBEL PRIZES > > The same irony arises with the awarding of the Nobel Peace prize. If the committee thought in the past that their judges were ethnocentric, blinkered, and had given too many awards either to Europeans and Americans or to traditional diplomats - still, at least one could make the argument that the prior winners were not killers, scoundrels, or na?fs. But Le Doc Tho (who refused the honor) and Yasser Arafat really were really deplorable figures. It is hard to see how Kim Dae-jung ("Chairman Kim, to my surprise, had a very positive responseS") brought peace to the Korean peninsula - perhaps easier to see how his use of bribery did. > > Mr. Carter should ask himself why 20 years of exemplary and distinguished charity work did not impress the panel, but suddenly and quite publicly attacking his own president in a time of war - in the words of the committee itself (Mr. Berge: "[the award] should be interpreted as a criticism of the line that the current administration has taken") - most surely did. I pass on Mr. Mandela and his recent racist outbursts. So the Nobel committee got its wish of being nontraditional - to the point that many now believe the award reflects either political opportunism at best or conveys discredit at worst. > > THE EU > > European bureaucrats have lectured about the EU's utopian accomplishments, which supposedly have alone saved a war-torn continent and given it 50 years of peace. But thanks to their proclamations and their recent loud behavior, we have had a long, second, and very good look at Brussels. And what we have learned is depressing - from its foreign policy to the elevation of an unelected bureaucracy over local popular councils. > > And we don't buy their Trotsky-like airbrushing away of Americans in their new history; instead, we are more likely to believe that peace in Europe since 1945 was preserved only by a United States military that kept allies on the same team and Russians out - and not by French and German managers. Never was the moral contrast more evident than at the recent NATO meeting in Germany, when Senators McCain and Lieberman and Secretary Rumsfeld talked of history, resoluteness, and a determination to stop evil, while the French and Germans countered with thinly veiled self-interest and overt fear. > > When the Cold War ended, the EU flunked its first test - 200,000 pour souls were butchered on its own doorstep. In contrast, the U.S. Constitution, a strong American military, and a sense of national character and confidence - not some borderless "North American Union" - have ensured both peace and our own autonomy on our own continent. Without the visions of supranational apparatchiks, we have managed not to go to war with Canada since 1812 and with Mexico since 1846. But if we were to open all our borders, adopt a socialist style of government, disarm, and turn our freedom over to 80,000 transcontinental Canadian, Mexican, and American bureaucrats, then I imagine things would heat up very quickly. Thank you, EU, for providing a model of international diplomacy and interstate relationships that we most definitely do not wish to emulate. > > BASES > > Most Americans didn't pay too much attention to where our troops were stationed. But thanks to the German Way and the Sunshine Policy, millions now are beginning to take notice - and what they are learning might not be what our foreign hosts intended. A pragmatic, no-nonsense American would perhaps ask Mr. Schroeder please to follow through with his promises of a "German Way," and thus to click his heels and kick out troops eastward into Poland or Czechoslovakia. > > And if we really are obstacles to tranquility in Korea, after a half-century millions of Americans would be only too happy to get out of the way there as well. We can give peace a chance quite easily from afar in Japan, or on carriers - or perhaps from home. If the United States is disturbing the peace in Korea, then perhaps China could do better with a nuclear Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea who, if threatened by its lunatic client state, will eventually turn out frightening weapons of deterrence as easily as Toyotas. > > REMOVING FASCISTS > > For years, critics of John Foster Dulles Realpolitik decried our support for unsavory tinhorn dictators. Idealists instead called for "human rights" in our foreign policy, an engagement that would resonate with those persecuted and oppressed by authoritarian regimes. > > Well, with the fall of the Berlin Wall, there is no longer any fear that today's soft-spoken socialists will become tomorrow's hardcore Stalinists. Right-wing fascists like Noriega, Milosevic, the Taliban, and Saddam are either gone or going thanks to the United States - not France or Cuba or China. Consensual governments, not generals with chests of pot-iron medals, more often followed their demise. Remember, leftists of the past called not for isolationism, but for active support for national liberationists. > > Good - we are finally convinced. Now their moment of solidarity has at last arrived. We have plenty of freedom fighters and democrats in Kurdistan and throughout Iraq who seek their support for grassroots, anti-fascistic movements. And? > > PREEMPTION AND UNILATERALISM > > After Vietnam, Americans were chastised into conceding that preemption and unilateralism were things of the past. Then we learned of slaughter in Bosnia and Kosovo - committed by Europeans and tolerated by Europeans. Mr. Clinton did not make the argument that Mr. Milosevic threatened the U.S. - imagine the outraged reaction, had Madeleine Albright with slides and intercepts proved that Serbia was seeking gas and germs that could threaten Americans. > > Instead, we adopted preemption - unilaterally, without Congressional approval, and quite apart from U.N. decrees - and bombed Serbian fascists into submission. In fact, Mr. Clinton and Ms. Albright ordered bombs to be dropped almost everywhere - Kosovo, Belgrade, the Sudan, and, yes (remember General Zinni's 1998 Operation Desert Fox) - Iraq. I suppose the moral lesson caught on, and so now we are doing the same once more to Saddam Hussein. Thanks in part to Mr. Clinton, unilateralism and preemption to try to protect us in advance, while saving innocents from monsters - in Bosnia, Kosovo, Somalia, and Haiti - are now good, while the wobbliness and moral equivocation of multilateralism and U.N. approval are deemed bad. Or at least I think they are. > > What accounts for these transparent contradictions? The fact that the U.N. building in New York was not reduced to rubble? Or that - so far - the Louvre has escaped a hijacked suicide Airbus? But these paradoxes become explicable if you remove the element of deductive anti-Americanism or, at home, the anti-Bush subtext. Keep that and there are no contradictions at all - only deep and age-old motives like envy, jealousy, rivalry, pride, fear, and insecurity. > > The U.N. beats up on the United States because it accepts that - unlike China or Syria - we are predictable, honorable, and committed to acting morally. Thus it finds psychic reassurance and a sense of puffed-up self-importance - on the cheap - by remonstrating with an America that wishes to stop a criminal regime from spreading havoc, rather than worrying about the demise of million of Tibetans, Syria's brutal creation of the puppet state of Lebanon, or Africans who complain that France has, without consultation, determined their fate. It is always better for a debating society to lecture those who listen than those who do not. > > So too a petulant, though wealthy, Germany and South Korea resent their dependence as American protectorates, reflecting their own sense of impotence through face-saving unease with the same benefactors who kept psychopaths like Milosevic and Kim Jong Il out of their comfortable and opulent havens. Gnash your teeth at an American who saved Germany, never a Russian who tried to flatten it - the ex-KGB Putin is now more welcome in Berlin than is the ex-NATO official Mr. Rumsfeld. And so it goes. A lip-biting Clinton's bombing of a mass murderer is one thing; a Texas-drawling, Bible-reading Bush is another. > > Still, besides the revelation of hypocrisy, the effect of all this has also been quite remarkable in creating a growing sense of American solidarity - precisely in terms of being so unlike those who criticize us. Has anti-anti-Americanism fueled a growing new sense of Americanism? We owe the U.N., the EU, the radical Islamic world, Mr. Mandela, the French, the Germans, and a host of others, I think, some thanks in this hour of crisis. By reminding us so often that they are not like us and often don't like us, we of all political persuasions and backgrounds finally are remembering that they were perhaps right all along - we really are a very different people. > > > ----------------- > R. A. Hettinga > The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation > 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA > "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, > [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to > experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' > > --- end forwarded text > > > -- > ----------------- > R. A. Hettinga > The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation > 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA > "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, > [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to > experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > irtheory-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > From rupton at pobox.com Thu Apr 3 10:34:16 2003 From: rupton at pobox.com (Ryan S. Upton) Date: Thu Apr 3 02:42:17 2003 Subject: Disappearing in plain view In-Reply-To: <3DE7BBD9.9060306@alumni.rice.edu> References: <3DE7BBD9.9060306@alumni.rice.edu> Message-ID: <20021129200448.GD23402@Mycroft> On Fri, Nov 29, 2002 at 01:11:21PM -0600, Wayne Baisley wrote: > Nobody understands my potato. > Nobody understands your Potato anymore Woody is stable From khare at alumni.caltech.edu Thu Apr 3 10:34:16 2003 From: khare at alumni.caltech.edu (Rohit Khare) Date: Thu Apr 3 02:42:20 2003 Subject: Argyria and the myth of the blue god, Krishna Message-ID: So I heard this utterly crazy story on 910 AM, C|Net Radio last night, and it turned out the talk-show host wasn't kidding -- silver can actually turn your skin blue. What I find even MORE astonishing is that there isn't a single page on google that even mentions argyria and Krishna, since this is a perfect fit to the myth of a blue-skinned god, of which there are many in Hinduism, and none so fundamental as Krishna. Well, at least now that I've posted this, there will be *one* hit :-) Rohit ================================================================== http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/1003blueskin03-ON.html Supplement leaves candidate with blue skin Associated Press Oct. 3, 2002 10:31 AM GREAT FALLS, Mont. - Montana's Libertarian candidate for Senate has turned blue from drinking a silver solution that he believed would protect him from disease. Stan Jones,a 63-year-old business consultant and part-time college instructor, said he started taking colloidal silver in 1999 for fear that Y2K disruptions might lead to a shortage of antibiotics. He made his own concoction by electrically charging a couple of silver wires in a glass of water. His skin began turning blue-gray a year ago. "People ask me if it's permanent and if I'm dead," he said. "I tell them I'm practicing for Halloween." He does not take the supplement any longer, but the skin condition, called argyria, is permanent. The condition is generally not serious. Colloidal silver dietary supplements are marketed widely as an anti-bacterial agent or immune-system booster, but some consider it quackery. Jones is one of three candidates seeking to unseat Democratic Sen. Max Baucus in November. The others are Republican state Sen. Mike Taylor http://www.arizonarepublic.com/news/gifs/breaking/1003blueskin03-ON.jpg -------------- next part -------------- Skipped content of type multipart/appledouble-------------- next part -------------- ================================================================== http://www.emedicine.com/derm/topic595.htm > Background: Argyria results from prolonged contact to or ingestion of > silver salts. It produces a gray to gray-black staining of skin and > mucous membranes produced by silver deposition. Silver may be deposited > in the skin either from industrial exposure or as a result of > medications containing silver salts. > > The most common cause of argyria is mechanical impregnation of the skin > by small silver particles in workers involved in silver mining, silver > refining, silverware and metal alloy manufacturing, metallic films on > glass and china, electroplating solutions, and photographic processing. > Colloidal silver dietary supplements are marketed widely for cancer, > AIDS, diabetes mellitus, and herpetic infections. Cases have followed > the prolonged use of silver salts for the irrigation of urethral or > nasal mucous membranes, in eye drops, wound dressing, and the excessive > use of an oral smoking remedy containing silver acetate. Argyria also > has been attributed to surgical and dental procedures (eg, silver > amalgam-tattooing, silver sutures used in abdominal surgery). Blue > macules have appeared at sites of acupuncture needles and silver > earring sites. Great individual variability exists in the length of > exposure and total dose needed to result in argyria. > ... > The normal human body contains about 1 mg silver; the smallest amount > of silver reported to produce generalized argyria in humans ranges from > 4-5 g to 20-40 g. Silver at 50-500 mg/kg body weight is the lethal > toxic dose in humans. ================================================================== http://together.net/~rjstan/ The Silver Supplement Fraud © 1998 Chick Schwartz Guess who took the colloidal silver (CS)? Rosemary did. That's why she is slate-gray. The condition is called argyria. It is irreversible and cannot be covered by makeup. Actually, Rosemary's doctor in New York prescribed CSP for her back in the fifties as a treatment for allergies. It was sold as a drug then. Today it is sold as a dietary supplement. You can find it in "health food" stores and on the Internet. You can even buy the equipment to make your own. It was snake oil when it was given to Rosemary. It is snake oil now. The only thing Rosemary recommends CSP for is a gray skin dye. She knows that it is safe, effective, and permanent when used for that purpose. She also knows that being a gray person in a black and white world can have a serious negative impact on your social and economic life. Promoters claim that CSP prevents and cures 650 diseases including Aids and cancer. They say that people with even a trace of silver in their bodies don't get sick! Both Rosemary and the FDA have asked them for their proof. All they get are quotes from old quacks who manufactured the stuff at the turn of the century, misquotes from reputable authors and wonderful anecdotes. "I've taken it everyday for four years and feel great," the saleslady says. The only problem Rosemary has with the anecdotes is that they are selectively chosen to sell CSP. The promoters refuse to include her negative anecdotes or those of all the other argyric people recorded in the medical literature. Rosemary had breast cancer at the age of 42. The silver in her body made her face so gray that the nurses in pre-op thought that she was in cardiac arrest! The promoters won't tell you this though. The FDA has told the promoters that if they want to continue making medical claims for CSP they will have to first have it approved as a drug. Of course, that doesn't stop them from selling the stuff as a "dietary supplement." It just prevents them from legally writing their claims on the label or putting them in their ads. And, oh yes, if you do decide to use CSP, have the product analysed by an independent lab. According to the dietary supplement industry itself, a lot of the stuff tested that is labelled colloidal silver really isn't. You see "dietary supplements," thanks to intense industry lobbying are unregulated by any government agency. So very often what is on the label isn't in the bottle. In fact, what is in the bottle may even be something more toxic than CSP. Buyer beware! > Gettler reported the case of the the "blue man", a curiosity at the > Barnum and Bailey circus, who was very sick and in his late sixties on > August 13, 1923 when he was admitted to Bellevue Hospital in New York > City. He subsequenly died there and his body was autopsied. His was one > of the worst cases of argyria ever reported in the medical literature. > Gettler stated that, "The color of the skin was of an unusually deep > blue and from a distance appeared almost black. This deep color was > almost uniform throughout the entire body, although it was more intense > over the exposed skin areas." The patient refused to answer questions. > The story he told at the cirus was that he had been suffering from > congenital heart disease which became worse when he fell from a horse > while he was an officer in the British army fighting in India. A friend > who had known him for thirty years said that he had been discolored for > all that time adding that he had seen a photo of him taken about > thirty-five years before his hospital admission. In it his skin > appeared to be a normal white color. He said that the blue man had > worked in silver mines. There are several reports in the medical > literature stating that silver miners developed argyria. As far as I > can tell, those reports are all based on this one unreliable report. > [p.636] From greg at endeavors.com Thu Apr 3 10:34:18 2003 From: greg at endeavors.com (Gregory Alan Bolcer) Date: Thu Apr 3 02:42:22 2003 Subject: Magi.NET App Streaming Message-ID: <53109A46D4F58F458B18D009EAEEDC8326179E@mail.endeavorstech.com> Absolutely awesome in the labs. -----Original Message----- From: Stephen D. Williams [mailto:sdw@lig.net] Sent: Tue 3/11/2003 10:56 AM To: Mr. FoRK Cc: Gregory Alan Bolcer; FoRK Subject: Re: Magi.NET App Streaming And how does this work with Linux desktops? sdw Mr. FoRK wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Gregory Alan Bolcer" > > > >>Endeavors Technology, Partners With Microsoft >> >> >Isn't "Foo Partners With Microsoft" usually followed up - after some period >of time - with "Foo Files For Bankrupcy"? > > -- sdw@lig.net http://sdw.st Stephen D. Williams 43392 Wayside Cir,Ashburn,VA 20147-4622 703-724-0118W 703-995-0407Fax Dec2001 From pkelly at ETS.NET Thu Apr 3 10:34:19 2003 From: pkelly at ETS.NET (Peter Kelly) Date: Thu Apr 3 02:42:25 2003 Subject: SSL proxy? Message-ID: <5B11AE71DCF590449EF8C77A61DF099417F8B1@bertha.ETS.NET> Hi there. I read your post recently about doing the following: HTTPS HTTP Client ------------> Apache -----------> WebLogic I am looking at doing the same thing with something like: HTTPS HTTP Client ------------> Apache -----------> LotusNotesApp1 LotusNotesAppServer2 LotusNotesAppServer3 etc. We would like to put the SSL cert on the Apache Reverse Proxy server and allow all external clients to be able to connect to the proxy securely, and have multiple servers on the inside that are being proxied. Can you possibly send me an example config from your setup to help get me started? Thanks -- Peter Kelly ETS.NET INC. 10-17705 Leslie Street Newmarket, ON L3Y 3E3 CANADA Phone: 1-905-713-9978 ext. 405 toll-free: 1-866-713-9978 ext. 405 Fax: 1-905-726-8118 Visit: http://www.ets.net Enterprise Email Virus Protection: http://vRelay.NET From Simon.North at synopsys.com Thu Apr 3 10:34:20 2003 From: Simon.North at synopsys.com (Simon North) Date: Thu Apr 3 02:42:26 2003 Subject: War is ... Message-ID: <3E775ACA.28367.20B8BBE6@localhost> Sorry, couldn't resist this one: War is God's way of teaching Americans geography. Ambrose Bierce From eugen at leitl.org Thu Apr 3 14:22:21 2003 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Thu Apr 3 04:14:59 2003 Subject: [fork] Operation Iraqi Freedom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Phil Harris wrote: > This may be old bits, but hey wtf. > > This is what Saddam is doing: > > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3284-614607,00.html This may be old bits, but hey wtf. This is what ShrubCo is doing: http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20Photos/Photos%20of%20Iraq%20war%20victims.htm From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 3 07:42:11 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 3 05:42:13 2003 Subject: So did I miss... In-Reply-To: <3E7D5B98-620E-11D7-9C21-003065F62CD6@whump.com> Message-ID: <1239E91A-65DA-11D7-8802-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> On Saturday, Mar 29, 2003, at 11:45 US/Central, Bill Humphries wrote: > The Rapture or The Singularity? Well, both, sort of. Unfortunately, it seems to have only effected JS Kelly. Or should I say: Hakim Bey. ;-) jb From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 3 08:03:03 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 3 06:03:06 2003 Subject: [SPORK] Press Release of the Willing an Opt-Out Program? Message-ID: [nb - this was sent before the outage, apologies if it's a bit stale] It's bad enough that we're essentially forging names of countries in the Press Release of the Willing. But how stupid is it to forge *the Solomon Islands* and *Slovenia*? Did we think they're so media-impoverished that they wouldn't notice? This piece also includes the Chain Letter of the Willing that you might've seen... hilarious. Our diplomatic success might've been far better if we'd tried this. http://www.nationinstitute.org/tomdispatch/index.mhtml?pid=527 jb From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 3 08:04:45 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 3 06:04:58 2003 Subject: [SPORK] Funny!? Your Commander-In-Chief In Action Message-ID: <39359104-65DD-11D7-8802-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> [nb - this was sent before the outage, apologies if it's a bit stale] This would be funny if it wasn't so fucking sad. Makes you proud to be an American, doesn't it? You really think this idiot is fit to lead this country and make decisions for you? (BTW, this is animated, so if it doesn't show up that way in your mail client, save it to your desktop and drag-n-drop it on your browser.) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: bushdig.gif Type: image/gif Size: 99537 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lair.xent.com/pipermail/fork/attachments/20030403/2a2ca7aa/bushdig.gif -------------- next part -------------- jb --- Good intentions will always be pleaded for any assumption of power. The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters. -Daniel Webster From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 3 08:05:02 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 3 06:05:51 2003 Subject: [SPORK] Iraq War Quiz Message-ID: <43AE9B20-65DD-11D7-8802-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> [nb - this was sent before the outage, apologies if it's a bit stale] Think you know enough about Iraq / our administration to have an informed opinion? Take this quiz to either confirm your wisdom or open your eyes. From: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=38&ItemID=3324 ---- Iraq War Quiz 1. The anti-war movement supports our troops by urging that they be brought home immediately so they neither kill nor get killed in a unjust war. How has the Bush administration shown its support for our troops? a. The Republican-controlled House Budget Committee voted to cut $25 billion in veterans benefits over the next 10 years. b. The Bush administration proposed cutting $172 million from impact aid programs which provide school funding for children of military personnel. c. The administration ordered the Dept. of Veterans Affairs to stop publicizing health benefits available to veterans. d. All of the above. -- 2. The anti-war movement believes that patriotism means urging our country to do what is right. How do Bush administration officials define patriotism? a. Patriotism means emulating Dick Cheney, who serves as Vice-President while receiving $100,000-$1,000,000 a year from Halliburton, the multi-billion dollar company which is already lining up for major contracts in post-war Iraq. b. Patriotism means emulating Richard Perle, the warhawk who serves as head of the Defense Intelligence Board while at the same time meeting with Saudi arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi on behalf of Trireme, a company of which he is a managing partner, involved in security and military technologies, and while agreeing to work as a paid lobbyist for Global Crossing, a telecommunications giant seeking a major Pentagon contract. c. Patriotism means emulating George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, John Bolton, Tom DeLay, John Ashcroft, Lewis Libby, and others who enthusiastically supported the Vietnam War while avoiding serving in it and who now are sending others to kill and be killed in Iraq. d. All of the above. -- 3. The Bush administration has accused Saddam Hussein of lying regarding his weapons of mass destruction. Which of the following might be considered less than truthful? a. Constant claims by the Bush administration that there was documentary evidence linking Iraq to attempted uranium purchases in Niger, despite the fact that the documents were forgeries and CIA analysts doubted their authenticity. b. A British intelligence report on Iraq's security services that was in fact plagiarized, with selected modifications, from a student article. c. The frequent citation of the incriminating testimony of Iraqi defector Hussein Kamel, while suppressing that part of the testimony in which Kamel stated that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction had been destroyed following the 1991 Gulf War. d. All of the above. -- 4. White House Press Secretary Ari Fleisher stormed out of a press conference when the assembled reporters broke into laughter after he declared that the U.S. would never try to bribe members of the UN. What should Fleisher have said to defend himself? a. It wasn't just bribery; we also ordered the bugging of the home and office phones and emails of the UN ambassadors of Security Council member states that were undecided on war. b. Oh, come on! We've been doing this for years. In 1990 when Yemen voted against authorizing war with Iraq, the U.S. ambassador declared "That will be the most expensive 'no' vote you ever cast." c. Why do you think the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act makes one of the conditions for an African country to receive preferential access to U.S. markets that it "not engage in activities that undermine United States national security or foreign policy interests"? d. All of the above. -- 5. George Bush has declared that "we have no fight with the Iraqi people." What could he have cited as supporting evidence? a. U.S. maintenance of 12 years of crippling sanctions that strengthened Saddam Hussein while contributing to the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians. b. The fact that "coalition" forces have indicated that they will use cluster bombs in Iraq, despite warnings from human rights groups that "The use of cluster munitions in Iraq will endanger civilians for years to come." c. By pointing to the analogy of Afghanistan, which the U.S. pledged not to forget about when the war was over, and for which the current Bush administration foreign aid budget request included not one cent in aid. d. All of the above. -- 6. The Bush administration has touted the many nations that are part of the "coalition of the willing." Which of the following statements about this coalition is true? a. In most of the coalition countries polls show that a majority, often an overwhelming majority, of the people oppose the war. b. More than ten of the members of the coalition of the willing are actually a coalition of the unwilling - unwilling to reveal their names. c. Coalition members - most of whose contributions to the war are negligible or even zero - constitute less than a quarter of the countries in the UN and contain less than 20% of the world's population. d. All of the above. -- 7. The war on Iraq is said to be part of the "war on terrorism." Which of the following is true? a. A senior American counterintelligence official said: "An American invasion of Iraq is already being used as a recruitment tool by Al Qaeda and other groups?.And it is a very effective tool." b. An American official, based in Europe, said Iraq had become "a battle cry, in a way," for Al Qaeda recruiters. c. France's leading counter-terrorism judge said: "Bin Laden's strategy has always been to demonstrate to the Islamic community that the West, and especially the U.S., is starting a global war against Muslims. An attack on Iraq might confirm this vision for many Muslims. I am very worried about the next wave of recruits." d. All of the above. -- 8. The Bush administration says it is waging war to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction. Which of the following is true? a. The United States has refused to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, viewed worldwide as the litmus test for seriousness about nuclear disarmament. b. The United States has insisted on a reservation to the Chemical Weapons Convention allowing the U.S. President the right to refuse an inspection of U.S. facilities on national security grounds, and blocked efforts to improve compliance with the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention. c. Vice Admiral Lowell E. Jacoby, Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, testified on Feb. 11, 2003, "The long-term trends with respect to WMD and missile proliferation are bleak. States seek these capabilities for regional purposes, or to provide a hedge to deter or offset U.S. military superiority." d. All of the above. -- 9. The Bush administration says it wants to bring democracy to Iraq and the Middle East. Which of the following is true? a. If there were democracy in Saudi Arabia today, backing for the U.S. war effort would be the first thing to go, given the country's "increasingly anti-American population deeply opposed to the war." b. The United States subverted some of the few democratic governments in the Middle East (Syria in 1949, Iran in 1953), and has backed undemocratic regimes in the region ever since. c. The United States supported the crushing of anti-Saddam Hussein revolts in Iraq in 1991. d. All of the above. -- 10. Colin Powell cited as evidence of an Iraq-Al Qaeda link an audiotape from bin Laden in which he called Saddam Hussein and his Baath Party regime "infidels." Which of the following is more compelling evidence? a. An FBI official told the New York Times: "We've been looking at this hard for more than a year and you know what, we just don't think it's there." b. According to a classified British intelligence report seen by BBC News, "There are no current links between the Iraqi regime and the al-Qaeda network." c. According to Rohan Gunaratna, author of Inside Al Qaeda: Global Network of Terror, "Since U.S. intervention in Afghanistan in October 2001, I have examined several tens of thousands of documents recovered from Al Qaeda and Taliban sources. In addition to listening to 240 tapes taken from Al Qaeda's central registry, I debriefed several Al Qaeda and Taliban detainees. I could find no evidence of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda." d. All of the above. -- Answers and Sources 1. d (a) Cong. Lane Evans, "Veterans Programs Slashed by House Republicans," Press Release, 3/13/03, http://www.veterans.house.gov/democratic/press/108th/3-13-03budget.htm. (b) Brian Faler, "Educators Angry Over Proposed Cut in Aid; Many Children in Military Families Would Feel Impact," Washington Post, 3/19/03, p. A29. (c) See Veterans' for Common Sense, letter to George W. Bush, 3/20/03 http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/print.asp?id=563; Melissa B. Robinson, "Hospitals Face Budget Crunch," Associated Press, 7/31/02; Jason Tait, "Veterans angered by marketing ban," Eagle-Tribune (Lawrence, MA), 8/2/02, http://www.eagletribune.com/news/stories/20020802/FP_003.htm 2. d (a) Warren Vieth and Elizabeth Douglass, " Ousting Hussein could open the door for U.S. and British firms. French, Russian and Chinese rivals would lose their edge," Los Angeles Times, 3/12/03, p. I:1; Robert Bryce and Julian Borger, "Halliburton: Cheney is still paid by Pentagon contractor, Bush deputy gets Dollars 1m from firm with Iraq oil deal," Guardian (London), 3/12/03, p. 5 (which notes that Halliburton "would not say how much the payments are; the obligatory disclosure statement filled by all top government officials says only that they are in the range of" $100,000 and $1 million. (b) Seymour M. Hersh, "Lunch with the Chairman," New Yorker, 3/16/03; Stephen Labaton, "Pentagon Adviser Is Also Advising Global Crossing," NYT, 3/21/03, p. C1. Perle is to be paid $725,000 for his lobbying effort, including $600,000 if his lobbying is successful. (c) New Hampshire Gazette, "The Chickenhawks," http://nhgazette.com/chickenhawks.html. 3. d (a) See the evidence collected in Cong. Henry Waxman's letter to George W. Bush, 3/17/03, http://www.house.gov/waxman/text/admin_iraq_march_17_let.htm. (b) See Glen Rangwala's report, http://traprockpeace.org/britishdossier.html. (c) See Glen Rangwala's report, http://traprockpeace.org/kamel.html. 4. d (a) Martin Bright, Ed Vulliamy, and Peter Beaumont, The Observer (London), 3/2/03. (b) Quoted in Phyllis Bennis, Calling the Shots: How Washington Dominates Today's UN, New York: Olive Branch, 1996, p. 33. (c) Sarah Anderson, Phyllis Bennis, and John Cavanagh, Coalition of the Willing or Coalition of the Coerced?: How The Bush Administration Influences Allies in Its War on Iraq, Washington, DC: Institute for Policy Studies, 2/26/03, p. 4. 5. d (a) For background, see Anthony Arnove, ed., Iraq Under Siege: The Deadly Impact of Sanctions and War, Cambridge: South End Press, updated ed. 2003. (b) Paul Waugh, "Labour MPs Attack Hoon After He Reveals That British Forces Will Use Cluster Bombs," Independent, 3/21/03, p. 4; Human Rights Watch, Press Release, 3/18/03: "Persian Gulf: U.S. Cluster Bomb Duds A Threat; Warning Against Use of Cluster Bombs in Iraq." (c) Zvi Bar'el, "Flaws in the Afghan Model," Ha'aretz, 3/14/03, http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/objects/pages/ PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=272884. 6. d (a) See, for example, the revealing comment of Secretary of State Powell: "We need to knock down this idea that nobody is on our side. So many nations recognize this danger [of Iraq's weapons]. And they do it in the face of public opposition." Quoted in Steven R. Weisman With Felicity Barringer, "Urgent Diplomacy Fails To Gain U.S. 9 Votes In The U.N." NYT, 3/10/03, p. A1) (b) U.S. Dept. of State, Daily Press Briefing, Richard Boucher, Washington, DC, 3/18/03. (c) Country list: White House, Statement of Support from Coalition, 3/25/03, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/print/20030325-8.html; population calculated from Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2001, Washington, DC: 2001, table 1327. Total includes USA. The White House list includes countries whose leaders have done no more than state their support for the United States, and the listing changes from day to day, with some countries being added and some removed. 7. d (a) Don Van Natta Jr. and Desmond Butler, "Anger On Iraq Seen As New Qaeda Recruiting Tool," NYT, 3/16/03, p. I:1. (b) Van Natta and Butler, NYT, 3/16/03. (c) Van Natta and Butler, NYT, 3/16/03. 8. d (a) Colum Lynch, "U.S. Boycotts Nuclear Test Ban Meeting; Some Delegates at U.N. Session Upset at Latest Snub of Pact Bush Won't Back," Washington Post, 11/12/02, p. A6. (b) Amy E. Smithson, "U.S. Implementation of the CWC," in Jonathan B. Tucker, The Chemical Weapons Convention: Implementation Challenges and Solutions, Monterey Institute, April 2001, pp. 23-29, http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/reports/tuckcwc.htm; Jonathan Tucker, "The Fifth Review Conference of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention," Feb. 2002, http://www.nti.org/e_research/e3_7b.html. (c) Testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, excerpted at http://traprockpeace.org/usefulquotesoniraq.html. 9. d (a) Craig S. Smith, "Saudi Arabia Seems Calm But, Many Say, Is Seething," NYT, 3/24/03, p. B13. In fact, "Though the Saudi government officially denies it, the bombing campaign is being directed from Saudi Arabia - something that few Saudis realize." (b) On Syria, see Douglas Little, ACold War and Covert Action: The United States and Syria, 1945 1958,@ Middle East Journal, vol. 44, no. 1, Winter 1990, pp. 55 57. On Iran, see Mark J. Gasiorowski, "The 1953 Coup D'Etat in Iran," International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 19, Aug. 1987, pp. 261-86. (c) Andrew Cockburn and Patrick Cockburn, Out of the Ashes: The Resurrection of Saddam Hussein, New York: HarperPerennial. 1999, chap. 1. 10. d (re audiotape, see David Johnston, "Top U.S. Officials Press Case Linking Iraq To Al Qaeda," NYT, 2/12/03, p. A1; Mohamad Bazzi, "U.S. says bin Laden tape urging Iraqis to attack appears real," Newsday, 2/12/03, p. A5. (a) James Risen and David Johnston, "Split at C.I.A. and F.B.I. On Iraqi Ties to Al Qaeda," NYT, 2/2/03, p. I:13. (b) "Leaked Report Rejects Iraqi al-Qaeda Link," BBC News, 2/5/03. (c) Rohan Gunaratna, "Iraq and Al Qaeda: No Evidence of Alliance," International Herald Tribune, 2/19/03. -- Interpreting Your Score 9-10 Correct: Excellent. Contact United for Peace and Justice, http://www.unitedforpeace.org/, and work to fight the war and the system that produced it. 6-8 Correct: Fair. You've been watching a few too many former generals and government officials who provide the "expert" commentary for the mainstream media. Read the alternative media! 3-5 Correct: Poor. Don't feel bad. George W. Bush only got a C- in International Relations at College. 0-2 Correct: Failing. You have a bright future as an "embedded" journalist. -- From gbolcer at endeavors.com Thu Apr 3 07:29:47 2003 From: gbolcer at endeavors.com (Gregory Alan Bolcer) Date: Thu Apr 3 07:10:42 2003 Subject: April Fool's over: FoRK is back...! References: <200304030608.h3368SjX002489@gremlin.ics.uci.edu> Message-ID: <3E8C536B.1FFD99EC@endeavors.com> Rohit Khare wrote: > > Sorry gang, still repairing. There may be random corruption(!) of the archives because of disk problems. Had to go install a brand new 400GB raid array to take care of the Gulf War II flamefests :-) > > I also shut down fork-noarchive. If you set the X-No-Archive flags on your own email postings, the mailbot will not add it to the xent pages. > > Best, > Ro What about fork-in-exile@yahoogroups.com? I sent a really funny Saddam joke there that'll be lost forever. Greg From tomwhore at slack.net Thu Apr 3 11:27:47 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Thu Apr 3 08:27:45 2003 Subject: Hot Boring Fetish Action Message-ID: "HOT BORING FETISH ACTION BACK TO BACK OFFICE CHAIR ACTION!!! These bad boys recline JUST FOR YOU! DRINKING GLASSES AT AWKWARD ANGLES! It's gonna tip... OR IS IT?!? IBUPROFEN WITH POTENTIAL ENERGY!!! All that energy stored up JUST FOR YOU! VCR COUNTERS READING ONE SECOND! Youll be spent in seconds" http://www.somethingawful.com/ From tomwhore at slack.net Thu Apr 3 11:28:33 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Thu Apr 3 08:28:31 2003 Subject: The "Birdhouse In Your Sould" distribution system Message-ID: In what I can only hope will sweep the nation I have started a distribution system I like to call "Make a Little Birdhouse In Your Soul" Distribution System . In front of my house is a birdhouse. It is the kind brids fly under and feed from a square mesh opening at the bottoms. The top of the birdhouse slide up the wires it is hanging from so the feedcakes can be changed. The part that slides up is a gable roof. The space on top of the feedcake and under the gabled roof large enough to hold 9 or so cds if they are in baggies or other thin wraps. I use baggies becuse of portland amazing weather system. The bird feeder in front of my house is now a distribution node for Knoppix ver 3.2 cds packaged in zip lock baggies along with a PTP sticker as an extra surprise. I am using this to distribute the cds to memebers of the local community wireless group (www.personaltelco.net). I have a stack of 15 or so cds in the house ready to refill on need. I put this up sunday, as of tuesday and one email 1 cd has been distributed. We shall see what happen as time goes on. So if your in the hood and need a Knoppix CD, go check the birdhouse. -tomwsmf From tomwhore at slack.net Thu Apr 3 11:29:30 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Thu Apr 3 08:29:28 2003 Subject: New wirelesss community network - LSCN Message-ID: Is maintaining a wireless node too much work? Are you unsure of all of these linksys nodes you keep seeing around? Well, then you are clearly part of the wrong wireless group! http://www.linksyscommunitynetwork.com Sign up today! -LSCN From bitbitch at magnesium.net Thu Apr 3 11:30:41 2003 From: bitbitch at magnesium.net (bitbitch@magnesium.net) Date: Thu Apr 3 08:31:14 2003 Subject: Wow. I'm almost scared to see this happen in the US. Message-ID: <5869503540.20030403113041@magnesium.net> The hoax was spawned from a 14-year-old's prank. Apparently people started picking up on this and paniced. I can only imagine what strange machinations are running through envious teens in the US. Some seriously scary shit. It's almost interesting to speculate how they'd do it. My guess, is if such a hoax latched everyone in, we'd finally see a use to the emergency broadcast system :-) http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,6232520%255E1702,00.html 6m SMSs avert SARS panic April 03, 2003 WHEN a false internet story about Asia's mystery illness sent fears through Hong Hong, authorities used a fast and simple way to shoot down the rumour - they sent a blanket text message to about 6 million mobile phones that denied the former British colony had been declared an "infected city." "We wanted to get our message out as quickly as possible to allay fears," Terence Yu, a spokesman for the Commerce, Information and Technology Bureau, said today. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, or SARS, has killed at least 78 people and sickened more than 2,200 worldwide. Hong Kong has had 16 deaths. More than 700 people have fallen ill and hundreds placed under quarantine in the city with a population of 6.8 million, with almost as many mobile phones. And it's now set a mobile phone precedent - at least locally - with its official text on the mystery disease. The government used the text message on Tuesday after the "infected city" hoax report appeared online, prompting panic among some residents who thought the territory would be shut down and rushed out to stock up on food and supplies. The government's text response said: "Director of Health announced at 3pm today there is no plan to declare Hong Kong as an infected area." "At first I wondered why they sent me such a weird message," said Ada Ko, a 47-year-old office assistant. "It's useful, but it came in a bit too late to calm the public." "It's a bit odd," said 20-year-old student Forrest Kan, who had been unaware of the "infected city" rumour until he got the message. The hoax story was allegedly posted by a 14-year-old boy who copied the website design of the popular Chinese-language Ming Pao newspaper. He has been arrested and was quoted as saying he did it for fun, and didn't think anybody would believe the story. The online rumour fuelled Hong Kong residents' fears of SARS, which already have hundreds of thousands of people wearing surgical masks. Some fear touching elevator buttons. A telecommunications professor said mass text messaging - or SMS messaging - was justified in emergencies, but could potentially be abused. "It's very important for phone operators to identify where the information comes from," said KL Ho, who teaches at the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering at the University of Hong Kong. "It's also very important to remind users not to believe just one single source," Ho said. "It'll be very dangerous if they do so. They should check the information from other channels, including TV and radio." Government spokesman Yu said officials would talk to mobile phone carriers about improving delivery if text messages are used again. The Associated Press -- bitbitch mailto:bitbitch@magnesium.net "When I saw God he was a vending machine ..." From Adam at KnowNow.com Thu Apr 3 09:18:36 2003 From: Adam at KnowNow.com (Adam Rifkin) Date: Thu Apr 3 09:23:35 2003 Subject: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. Message-ID: <9C98E3ADB7D91044961ECE49C991253E0B1E05@othello.knownow.com> http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/03/technology/circuits/03driv.html >From a Slim Black Box, Shared Knowledge Streams Wirelessly By THOMAS J. FITZGERALD The Martian NetDrive Wireless sounds as if it might be a device capable of connecting you with extraterrestrial neighbors. Its reach is not quite that far, but it does allow people who are not in the same room to share data. The device, a wireless storage system from Martian Technology, stores files in a central location so they can be shared among users on a home or office network. Any user on the network can call up digital photos, music files or documents, and files are backed up in the central base. The Martian NetDrive Wireless is essentially a computer programmed to handle the single task of sharing files. It runs a customized version of the Linux operating system, has a fanless processor (for noise reduction), and offers 32 megabytes of random access memory, enough for file sharing on smaller networks. The device, a nondescript black box, can be tucked away in a closet, garage or basement. It communicates wirelessly (using the 802.11b Wi-Fi standard) with Windows, Mac and Linux computers, and its hard drive comes in two sizes: 40 gigabytes ($399), and 120 gigabytes ($479). It can be ordered at www.martian.com. Steve Dossick, the president of Martian Technology, a small Silicon Valley company, said the Linux system provided flexibility for future enhancements that will be free to customers. One of those enhancements, wireless printing, will soon allow users to attach a printer to one of the unit's several U.S.B. ports. ---- aDaM@KNoWNoW.CoM http://mod-pubsub.sf.net/ From dl at silcom.com Thu Apr 3 10:59:28 2003 From: dl at silcom.com (Dave Long) Date: Thu Apr 3 10:48:38 2003 Subject: The Philosopher of Islamic Terror In-Reply-To: Message from fork-request@xent.com <20030328043902.30508.690.Mailman@lair.xent.com> Message-ID: <200304031859.KAA08685@maltesecat> > Can our "free society" elect leaders or find exemplars who can lead from > the front by example? Who can make the case for secular humanism, > religious tolerance, and the separation of church and state? If one makes the case for religious tolerance, the others might follow: secular humanism, due to the fact that tolerating the irreligious is just a degenerate case of religious tolerance; and separation of church and state, because it otherwise becomes difficult to keep one single state over many religions. [0] Unfortunately, in European history at least, it has not been so much a matter of making the case as it has been Proof By Exhaustion: protestants and catholics fought for ~30 years to wipe each other out ("one less man, one less vote"?), and only after they failed at that were they forced to try the alternative of Brotherly Love. [1] Maybe I shouldn't ramble on about such moldies. The notion of a Westphalian Peace (just because you know you are on the side of the angels isn't sufficient reason to start a war) is pretty much now in the dustbin of history. [2] -Dave :: :: :: [0] What if the state were pantheistic, and had some sort of proportional representation? That only works up until the point where monotheists complain about all the other state religions. [1] Perhaps it was that Acting Like Christians Toward One Another had not been tried and found wanting, but found difficult, and left untried? [2] Not that it hasn't been for some while. How much of the XXth century can be explained as people who knew better how to live (due to Holiness, Herrenmoral, or Hegel and History) helping out those not so enlightened? The Bolshies were among the enthusiastic egg breakers, maybe due to overconfidence in the imminence of the omelet: Kissinger, _Diplomacy_ > [Early Bolsheviks] never dealt with the question of how to conduct > foreign policy among sovereign states. They were certain that > world revolution would follow their victory in Russia in a few > months' time; extreme pessimists thought it might take as long > as a few years. Leon Trotsky, the first Soviet Foreign Minister, > viewed his task as little more than that of a clerk who, in order > to discredit the capitalists, would make public the various secret > treaties by which they had proposed to divide the spoils of war > amongst themselves. He defined his role as being to "issue a few > revolutionary proclamations to the peoples of the world and then > shut up shop". :: :: :: Random comment: If Qutb's readers are searching for a creed that will order the ins and outs of everyday secular life, then it ought to be much easier to convert them to consumerism than it was to convert the christians. From klassa at nc.rr.com Thu Apr 3 13:56:45 2003 From: klassa at nc.rr.com (klassa@nc.rr.com) Date: Thu Apr 3 10:56:45 2003 Subject: anybody want a job at Microsoft? Message-ID: <6792.1049396205@qwop.com> I'm still not receiving FoRK mail, so don't reply to the list and expect me to receive your message... I've been getting mail from a "Leah Williams", who is a technical recruiter at M$. She's looking for: > I am looking for Software Design Engineers and Software Testers for the > Windows Networking and Communications group. Ideally, this individual will > have experience with networking protocols and operating systems. A very > qualified candidate will have experience with server side development > and/or testing experience. Strong C or C++ programming experience is > preferred. When I told her that I don't know of anybody like this, she said she's also looking for: > Any candidates with strong C/C++ software development skills are > interesting to us if they have worked on large scale applications. Let > me know if anyone does come to mind with this area of expertise. If this is you, and you want her address, let me know. John From gtn at rbii.com Thu Apr 3 14:22:32 2003 From: gtn at rbii.com (Gavin Thomas Nicol) Date: Thu Apr 3 12:39:38 2003 Subject: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. In-Reply-To: <9C98E3ADB7D91044961ECE49C991253E0B1E05@othello.knownow.com> References: <9C98E3ADB7D91044961ECE49C991253E0B1E05@othello.knownow.com> Message-ID: <200304031422.32688.gtn@rbii.com> On Thursday 03 April 2003 12:18 pm, Adam Rifkin wrote: > http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/03/technology/circuits/03driv.html Hah. I built one of those by ordering the basic box at caseoutlet.com added a disk, and a stick of memory. From eugen at leitl.org Wed Apr 2 16:36:39 2003 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Thu Apr 3 13:27:57 2003 Subject: RG: [radical-science] Mesopotamia. Babylon. The Tigris and Euphrates (fwd) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 15:00:20 +0100 From: Ian Pitchford To: radical-science@yahoogroups.com, SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE@LIST.UVM.EDU Subject: [radical-science] Mesopotamia. Babylon. The Tigris and Euphrates Mesopotamia. Babylon. The Tigris and Euphrates How many children, in how many classrooms, over how many centuries, have hang-glided through the past, transported on the wings of these words? And now the bombs are falling, incinerating and humiliating that ancient civilisation Arundhati Roy Wednesday April 2, 2003 The Guardian On the steel torsos of their missiles, adolescent American soldiers scrawl colourful messages in childish handwriting: For Saddam, from the Fat Boy Posse. A building goes down. A marketplace. A home. A girl who loves a boy. A child who only ever wanted to play with his older brother's marbles. On March 21, the day after American and British troops began their illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq, an "embedded" CNN correspondent interviewed an American soldier. "I wanna get in there and get my nose dirty," Private AJ said. "I wanna take revenge for 9/11." To be fair to the correspondent, even though he was "embedded" he did sort of weakly suggest that so far there was no real evidence that linked the Iraqi government to the September 11 attacks. Private AJ stuck his teenage tongue out all the way down to the end of his chin. "Yeah, well that stuff's way over my head," he said. According to a New York Times/CBS News survey, 42 per cent of the American public believes that Saddam Hussein is directly responsible for the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. And an ABC news poll says that 55 per cent of Americans believe that Saddam Hussein directly supports al-Qaida. What percentage of America's armed forces believe these fabrications is anybody's guess. It is unlikely that British and American troops fighting in Iraq are aware that their governments supported Saddam Hussein both politically and financially through his worst excesses. But why should poor AJ and his fellow soldiers be burdened with these details? It does not matter any more, does it? Hundreds of thousands of men, tanks, ships, choppers, bombs, ammunition, gas masks, high-protein food, whole aircrafts ferrying toilet paper, insect repellent, vitamins and bottled mineral water, are on the move. The phenomenal logistics of Operation Iraqi Freedom make it a universe unto itself. It doesn't need to justify its existence any more. It exists. It is. President George W Bush, commander in chief of the US army, navy, airforce and marines has issued clear instructions: "Iraq. Will. Be. Liberated." (Perhaps he means that even if Iraqi people's bodies are killed, their souls will be liberated.) American and British citizens owe it to the supreme commander to forsake thought and rally behind their troops. Their countries are at war. And what a war it is. After using the "good offices" of UN diplomacy (economic sanctions and weapons inspections) to ensure that Iraq was brought to its knees, its people starved, half a million of its children killed, its infrastructure severely damaged, after making sure that most of its weapons have been destroyed, in an act of cowardice that must surely be unrivalled in history, the "Allies"/"Coalition of the Willing"(better known as the Coalition of the Bullied and Bought) - sent in an invading army! Operation Iraqi Freedom? I don't think so. It's more like Operation Let's Run a Race, but First Let Me Break Your Knees. So far the Iraqi army, with its hungry, ill-equipped soldiers, its old guns and ageing tanks, has somehow managed to temporarily confound and occasionally even outmanoeuvre the "Allies". Faced with the richest, best-equipped, most powerful armed forces the world has ever seen, Iraq has shown spectacular courage and has even managed to put up what actually amounts to a defence. A defence which the Bush/Blair Pair have immediately denounced as deceitful and cowardly. (But then deceit is an old tradition with us natives. When we are invaded/ colonised/occupied and stripped of all dignity, we turn to guile and opportunism.) Even allowing for the fact that Iraq and the "Allies" are at war, the extent to which the "Allies" and their media cohorts are prepared to go is astounding to the point of being counterproductive to their own objectives. When Saddam Hussein appeared on national TV to address the Iraqi people after the failure of the most elaborate assassination attempt in history - "Operation Decapitation" - we had Geoff Hoon, the British defence secretary, deriding him for not having the courage to stand up and be killed, calling him a coward who hides in trenches. We then had a flurry of Coalition speculation - Was it really Saddam, was it his double? Or was it Osama with a shave? Was it pre-recorded? Was it a speech? Was it black magic? Will it turn into a pumpkin if we really, really want it to? After dropping not hundreds, but thousands of bombs on Baghdad, when a marketplace was mistakenly blown up and civilians killed - a US army spokesman implied that the Iraqis were blowing themselves up! "They're using very old stock. Their missiles go up and come down." If so, may we ask how this squares with the accusation that the Iraqi regime is a paid-up member of the Axis of Evil and a threat to world peace? When the Arab TV station al-Jazeera shows civilian casualties it's denounced as "emotive" Arab propaganda aimed at orchestrating hostility towards the "Allies", as though Iraqis are dying only in order to make the "Allies" look bad. Even French television has come in for some stick for similar reasons. But the awed, breathless footage of aircraft carriers, stealth bombers and cruise missiles arcing across the desert sky on American and British TV is described as the "terrible beauty" of war. When invading American soldiers (from the army "that's only here to help") are taken prisoner and shown on Iraqi TV, George Bush says it violates the Geneva convention and "exposes the evil at the heart of the regime". But it is entirely acceptable for US television stations to show the hundreds of prisoners being held by the US government in Guantanamo Bay, kneeling on the ground with their hands tied behind their backs, blinded with opaque goggles and with earphones clamped on their ears, to ensure complete visual and aural deprivation. When questioned about the treatment of these prisoners, US Government officials don't deny that they're being being ill-treated. They deny that they're "prisoners of war"! They call them "unlawful combatants", implying that their ill-treatment is legitimate! (So what's the party line on the massacre of prisoners in Mazar-e-Sharif, Afghanistan? Forgive and forget? And what of the prisoner tortured to death by the special forces at the Bagram airforce base? Doctors have formally called it homicide.) When the "Allies" bombed the Iraqi television station (also, incidentally, a contravention of the Geneva convention), there was vulgar jubilation in the American media. In fact Fox TV had been lobbying for the attack for a while. It was seen as a righteous blow against Arab propaganda. But mainstream American and British TV continue to advertise themselves as "balanced" when their propaganda has achieved hallucinatory levels. Why should propaganda be the exclusive preserve of the western media? Just because they do it better? Western journalists "embedded" with troops are given the status of heroes reporting from the frontlines of war. Non-"embedded" journalists (such as the BBC's Rageh Omaar, reporting from besieged and bombed Baghdad, witnessing, and clearly affected by the sight of bodies of burned children and wounded people) are undermined even before they begin their reportage: "We have to tell you that he is being monitored by the Iraqi authorities." Increasingly, on British and American TV, Iraqi soldiers are being referred to as "militia" (ie: rabble). One BBC correspondent portentously referred to them as "quasi-terrorists". Iraqi defence is "resistance" or worse still, "pockets of resistance", Iraqi military strategy is deceit. (The US government bugging the phone lines of UN security council delegates, reported by the Observer, is hard-headed pragmatism.) Clearly for the "Allies", the only morally acceptable strategy the Iraqi army can pursue is to march out into the desert and be bombed by B-52s or be mowed down by machine-gun fire. Anything short of that is cheating. And now we have the siege of Basra. About a million and a half people, 40 per cent of them children. Without clean water, and with very little food. We're still waiting for the legendary Shia "uprising", for the happy hordes to stream out of the city and rain roses and hosannahs on the "liberating" army. Where are the hordes? Don't they know that television productions work to tight schedules? (It may well be that if Saddam's regime falls there will be dancing on the streets of Basra. But then, if the Bush regime were to fall, there would be dancing on the streets the world over.) After days of enforcing hunger and thirst on the citizens of Basra, the "Allies" have brought in a few trucks of food and water and positioned them tantalisingly on the outskirts of the city. Desperate people flock to the trucks and fight each other for food. (The water we hear, is being sold. To revitalise the dying economy, you understand.) On top of the trucks, desperate photographers fought each other to get pictures of desperate people fighting each other for food. Those pictures will go out through photo agencies to newspapers and glossy magazines that pay extremely well. Their message: The messiahs are at hand, distributing fishes and loaves. As of July last year the delivery of $5.4bn worth of supplies to Iraq was blocked by the Bush/Blair Pair. It didn't really make the news. But now under the loving caress of live TV, 450 tonnes of humanitarian aid - a minuscule fraction of what's actually needed (call it a script prop) - arrived on a British ship, the "Sir Galahad". Its arrival in the port of Umm Qasr merited a whole day of live TV broadcasts. Barf bag, anyone? Nick Guttmann, head of emergencies for Christian Aid, writing for the Independent on Sunday said that it would take 32 Sir Galahad's a day to match the amount of food Iraq was receiving before the bombing began. We oughtn't to be surprised though. It's old tactics. They've been at it for years. Consider this moderate proposal by John McNaughton from the Pentagon Papers, published during the Vietnam war: "Strikes at population targets (per se) are likely not only to create a counterproductive wave of revulsion abroad and at home, but greatly to increase the risk of enlarging the war with China or the Soviet Union. Destruction of locks and dams, however - if handled right - might ... offer promise. It should be studied. Such destruction does not kill or drown people. By shallow-flooding the rice, it leads after time to widespread starvation (more than a million?) unless food is provided - which we could offer to do 'at the conference table'." Times haven't changed very much. The technique has evolved into a doctrine. It's called "Winning Hearts and Minds". So, here's the moral maths as it stands: 200,000 Iraqis estimated to have been killed in the first Gulf war. Hundreds of thousands dead because of the economic sanctions. (At least that lot has been saved from Saddam Hussein.) More being killed every day. Tens of thousands of US soldiers who fought the 1991 war officially declared "disabled" by a disease called the Gulf war syndrome, believed in part to be caused by exposure to depleted uranium. It hasn't stopped the "Allies" from continuing to use depleted uranium. And now this talk of bringing the UN back into the picture. But that old UN girl - it turns out that she just ain't what she was cracked up to be. She's been demoted (although she retains her high salary). Now she's the world's janitor. She's the Philippino cleaning lady, the Indian jamadarni, the postal bride from Thailand, the Mexican household help, the Jamaican au pair. She's employed to clean other peoples' shit. She's used and abused at will. Despite Blair's earnest submissions, and all his fawning, Bush has made it clear that the UN will play no independent part in the administration of postwar Iraq. The US will decide who gets those juicy "reconstruction" contracts. But Bush has appealed to the international community not to "politicise" the issue of humanitarian aid. On the March 28, after Bush called for the immediate resumption of the UN's oil for food programme, the UN security council voted unanimously for the resolution. This means that everybody agrees that Iraqi money (from the sale of Iraqi oil) should be used to feed Iraqi people who are starving because of US led sanctions and the illegal US-led war. Contracts for the "reconstruction" of Iraq we're told, in discussions on the business news, could jump-start the world economy. It's funny how the interests of American corporations are so often, so successfully and so deliberately confused with the interests of the world economy. While the American people will end up paying for the war, oil companies, weapons manufacturers, arms dealers, and corporations involved in "reconstruction" work will make direct gains from the war. Many of them are old friends and former employers of the Bush/ Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rice cabal. Bush has already asked Congress for $75bn. Contracts for "re-construction" are already being negotiated. The news doesn't hit the stands because much of the US corporate media is owned and managed by the same interests. Operation Iraqi Freedom, Tony Blair assures us is about returning Iraqi oil to the Iraqi people. That is, returning Iraqi oil to the Iraqi people via corporate multinationals. Like Shell, like Chevron, like Halliburton. Or are we missing the plot here? Perhaps Halliburton is actually an Iraqi company? Perhaps US vice-president Dick Cheney (who is a former director of Halliburton) is a closet Iraqi? As the rift between Europe and America deepens, there are signs that the world could be entering a new era of economic boycotts. CNN reported that Americans are emptying French wine into gutters, chanting, "We don't want your stinking wine." We've heard about the re-baptism of French fries. Freedom fries they're called now. There's news trickling in about Americans boycotting German goods. The thing is that if the fallout of the war takes this turn, it is the US who will suffer the most. Its homeland may be defended by border patrols and nuclear weapons, but its economy is strung out across the globe. Its economic outposts are exposed and vulnerable to attack in every direction. Already the internet is buzzing with elaborate lists of American and British government products and companies that should be boycotted. Apart from the usual targets, Coke, Pepsi and McDonald's - government agencies such as USAID, the British department for international development, British and American banks, Arthur Anderson, Merrill Lynch, American Express, corporations such as Bechtel, General Electric, and companies such as Reebok, Nike and Gap - could find themselves under siege. These lists are being honed and re fined by activists across the world. They could become a practical guide that directs and channels the amorphous, but growing fury in the world. Suddenly, the "inevitability" of the project of corporate globalisation is beginning to seem more than a little evitable. It's become clear that the war against terror is not really about terror, and the war on Iraq not only about oil. It's about a superpower's self-destructive impulse towards supremacy, stranglehold, global hegemony. The argument is being made that the people of Argentina and Iraq have both been decimated by the same process. Only the weapons used against them differ: In one case it's an IMF chequebook. In the other, cruise missiles. Finally, there's the matter of Saddam's arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. (Oops, nearly forgot about those!) In the fog of war - one thing's for sure - if Saddam 's regime indeed has weapons of mass destruction, it is showing an astonishing degree of responsibility and restraint in the teeth of extreme provocation. Under similar circumstances, (say if Iraqi troops were bombing New York and laying siege to Washington DC) could we expect the same of the Bush regime? Would it keep its thousands of nuclear warheads in their wrapping paper? What about its chemical and biological weapons? Its stocks of anthrax, smallpox and nerve gas? Would it? Excuse me while I laugh. In the fog of war we're forced to speculate: Either Saddam is an extremely responsible tyrant. Or - he simply does not possess weapons of mass destruction. Either way, regardless of what happens next, Iraq comes out of the argument smelling sweeter than the US government. So here's Iraq - rogue state, grave threat to world peace, paid-up member of the Axis of Evil. Here's Iraq, invaded, bombed, besieged, bullied, its sovereignty shat upon, its children killed by cancers, its people blown up on the streets. And here's all of us watching. CNN-BBC, BBC-CNN late into the night. Here's all of us, enduring the horror of the war, enduring the horror of the propaganda and enduring the slaughter of language as we know and understand it. Freedom now means mass murder (or, in the US, fried potatoes). When someone says "humanitarian aid" we automatically go looking for induced starvation. "Embedded" I have to admit, is a great find. It's what it sounds like. And what about "arsenal of tactics?" Nice! In most parts of the world, the invasion of Iraq is being seen as a racist war. The real danger of a racist war unleashed by racist regimes is that it engenders racism in everybody - perpetrators, victims, spectators. It sets the parameters for the debate, it lays out a grid for a particular way of thinking. There is a tidal wave of hatred for the US rising from the ancient heart of the world. In Africa, Latin America, Asia, Europe, Australia. I encounter it every day. Sometimes it comes from the most unlikely sources. Bankers, businessmen, yuppie students, and they bring to it all the crassness of their conservative, illiberal politics. That absurd inability to separate governments from people: America is a nation of morons, a nation of murderers, they say, (with the same carelessness with which they say, "All Muslims are terrorists"). Even in the grotesque universe of racist insult, the British make their entry as add-ons. Arse-lickers, they're called. Suddenly, I, who have been vilified for being "anti-American" and "anti-west", find myself in the extraordinary position of defending the people of America. And Britain. Those who descend so easily into the pit of racist abuse would do well to remember the hundreds of thousands of American and British citizens who protested against their country's stockpile of nuclear weapons. And the thousands of American war resisters who forced their government to withdraw from Vietnam. They should know that the most scholarly, scathing, hilarious critiques of the US government and the "American way of life" comes from American citizens. And that the funniest, most bitter condemnation of their prime minister comes from the British media. Finally they should remember that right now, hundreds of thousands of British and American citizens are on the streets protesting the war. The Coalition of the Bullied and Bought consists of governments, not people. More than one third of America's citizens have survived the relentless propaganda they've been subjected to, and many thousands are actively fighting their own government. In the ultra-patriotic climate that prevails in the US, that's as brave as any Iraqi fighting for his or her homeland. While the "Allies" wait in the desert for an uprising of Shia Muslims on the streets of Basra, the real uprising is taking place in hundreds of cities across the world. It has been the most spectacular display of public morality ever seen. Most courageous of all, are the hundreds of thousands of American people on the streets of America's great cities - Washington, New York, Chicago, San Francisco. The fact is that the only institution in the world today that is more powerful than the American government, is American civil society. American citizens have a huge responsibility riding on their shoulders. How can we not salute and support those who not only acknowledge but act upon that responsibility? They are our allies, our friends. At the end of it all, it remains to be said that dictators like Saddam Hussein, and all the other despots in the Middle East, in the central Asian republics, in Africa and Latin America, many of them installed, supported and financed by the US government, are a menace to their own people. Other than strengthening the hand of civil society (instead of weakening it as has been done in the case of Iraq), there is no easy, pristine way of dealing with them. (It's odd how those who dismiss the peace movement as utopian, don't hesitate to proffer the most absurdly dreamy reasons for going to war: to stamp out terrorism, install democracy, eliminate fascism, and most entertainingly, to "rid the world of evil-doers".) Regardless of what the propaganda machine tells us, these tin-pot dictators are not the greatest threat to the world. The real and pressing danger, the greatest threat of all is the locomotive force that drives the political and economic engine of the US government, currently piloted by George Bush. Bush-bashing is fun, because he makes such an easy, sumptuous target. It's true that he is a dangerous, almost suicidal pilot, but the machine he handles is far more dangerous than the man himself. Despite the pall of gloom that hangs over us today, I'd like to file a cautious plea for hope: in times of war, one wants one's weakest enemy at the helm of his forces. And President George W Bush is certainly that. Any other even averagely intelligent US president would have probably done the very same things, but would have managed to smoke-up the glass and confuse the opposition. Perhaps even carry the UN with him. Bush's tactless imprudence and his brazen belief that he can run the world with his riot squad, has done the opposite. He has achieved what writers, activists and scholars have striven to achieve for decades. He has exposed the ducts. He has placed on full public view the working parts, the nuts and bolts of the apocalyptic apparatus of the American empire. Now that the blueprint (The Ordinary Person's Guide to Empire) has been put into mass circulation, it could be disabled quicker than the pundits predicted. Bring on the spanners. http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,927712,00.html ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Save Smiley. Help put Messenger back in the office. http://us.click.yahoo.com/4PqtEC/anyFAA/i5gGAA/PMYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Unsubscribe or change your subscription options at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radical-science Join Radical Science: radical-science-subscribe@yahoogroups.com Archive: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radical-science/messages Human Nature Review: http://human-nature.com/ Human Nature Daily Review: http://human-nature.com/nibbs/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From beberg at mithral.com Thu Apr 3 15:35:30 2003 From: beberg at mithral.com (Adam L. Beberg) Date: Thu Apr 3 13:35:52 2003 Subject: So did I miss... In-Reply-To: <3E7D5B98-620E-11D7-9C21-003065F62CD6@whump.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 29 Mar 2003, Bill Humphries wrote: > The Rapture or The Singularity? > > Or did the xent.com server implode? My fault... didn't mean ALL of FoRK, but noone ever listens anyway. - Adam L. Beberg - beberg@mithral.com http://www.mithral.com/~beberg/ On Fri, 28 Mar 2003, Adam L. Beberg wrote: > On Fri, 28 Mar 2003, Russell Turpin wrote: > > > http://tv.yahoo.com/news/wwn/20030319/104808600007.html > > "Weekly World News will continue to follow this story " hahahahahahha! > > You are fined 3 credits for mislabeling [HUMOR] as [BITS], and are > prohibited from posting to FoRK for the weekend. From gbolcer at endeavors.com Wed Apr 2 08:58:52 2003 From: gbolcer at endeavors.com (Gregory Alan Bolcer) Date: Thu Apr 3 13:41:37 2003 Subject: Last Rites Message-ID: <3E8B16CC.8090000@endeavors.com> Has FoRK been forked or have I just been unwittingly unsubscribed? I didn't think my comments were *that* offensive. Latest war rumor, Saddam in the first night of airstrikes lost a leg and his genitals in the explosion. Immediately there were 5 Saddam lookalikes that showed up in Syria seeking asylum who didn't want to have their dicks cut off. Greg -- Gregory Alan Bolcer, CTO | work: +1.949.833.2800 gbolcer at endeavors.com | http://endeavors.com Endeavors Technology, Inc.| cell: +1.714.928.5476 From eugen at leitl.org Wed Apr 2 16:36:39 2003 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Thu Apr 3 13:42:08 2003 Subject: RG: [radical-science] Mesopotamia. Babylon. The Tigris and Euphrates (fwd) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 15:00:20 +0100 From: Ian Pitchford To: radical-science@yahoogroups.com, SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE@LIST.UVM.EDU Subject: [radical-science] Mesopotamia. Babylon. The Tigris and Euphrates Mesopotamia. Babylon. The Tigris and Euphrates How many children, in how many classrooms, over how many centuries, have hang-glided through the past, transported on the wings of these words? And now the bombs are falling, incinerating and humiliating that ancient civilisation Arundhati Roy Wednesday April 2, 2003 The Guardian On the steel torsos of their missiles, adolescent American soldiers scrawl colourful messages in childish handwriting: For Saddam, from the Fat Boy Posse. A building goes down. A marketplace. A home. A girl who loves a boy. A child who only ever wanted to play with his older brother's marbles. On March 21, the day after American and British troops began their illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq, an "embedded" CNN correspondent interviewed an American soldier. "I wanna get in there and get my nose dirty," Private AJ said. "I wanna take revenge for 9/11." To be fair to the correspondent, even though he was "embedded" he did sort of weakly suggest that so far there was no real evidence that linked the Iraqi government to the September 11 attacks. Private AJ stuck his teenage tongue out all the way down to the end of his chin. "Yeah, well that stuff's way over my head," he said. According to a New York Times/CBS News survey, 42 per cent of the American public believes that Saddam Hussein is directly responsible for the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. And an ABC news poll says that 55 per cent of Americans believe that Saddam Hussein directly supports al-Qaida. What percentage of America's armed forces believe these fabrications is anybody's guess. It is unlikely that British and American troops fighting in Iraq are aware that their governments supported Saddam Hussein both politically and financially through his worst excesses. But why should poor AJ and his fellow soldiers be burdened with these details? It does not matter any more, does it? Hundreds of thousands of men, tanks, ships, choppers, bombs, ammunition, gas masks, high-protein food, whole aircrafts ferrying toilet paper, insect repellent, vitamins and bottled mineral water, are on the move. The phenomenal logistics of Operation Iraqi Freedom make it a universe unto itself. It doesn't need to justify its existence any more. It exists. It is. President George W Bush, commander in chief of the US army, navy, airforce and marines has issued clear instructions: "Iraq. Will. Be. Liberated." (Perhaps he means that even if Iraqi people's bodies are killed, their souls will be liberated.) American and British citizens owe it to the supreme commander to forsake thought and rally behind their troops. Their countries are at war. And what a war it is. After using the "good offices" of UN diplomacy (economic sanctions and weapons inspections) to ensure that Iraq was brought to its knees, its people starved, half a million of its children killed, its infrastructure severely damaged, after making sure that most of its weapons have been destroyed, in an act of cowardice that must surely be unrivalled in history, the "Allies"/"Coalition of the Willing"(better known as the Coalition of the Bullied and Bought) - sent in an invading army! Operation Iraqi Freedom? I don't think so. It's more like Operation Let's Run a Race, but First Let Me Break Your Knees. So far the Iraqi army, with its hungry, ill-equipped soldiers, its old guns and ageing tanks, has somehow managed to temporarily confound and occasionally even outmanoeuvre the "Allies". Faced with the richest, best-equipped, most powerful armed forces the world has ever seen, Iraq has shown spectacular courage and has even managed to put up what actually amounts to a defence. A defence which the Bush/Blair Pair have immediately denounced as deceitful and cowardly. (But then deceit is an old tradition with us natives. When we are invaded/ colonised/occupied and stripped of all dignity, we turn to guile and opportunism.) Even allowing for the fact that Iraq and the "Allies" are at war, the extent to which the "Allies" and their media cohorts are prepared to go is astounding to the point of being counterproductive to their own objectives. When Saddam Hussein appeared on national TV to address the Iraqi people after the failure of the most elaborate assassination attempt in history - "Operation Decapitation" - we had Geoff Hoon, the British defence secretary, deriding him for not having the courage to stand up and be killed, calling him a coward who hides in trenches. We then had a flurry of Coalition speculation - Was it really Saddam, was it his double? Or was it Osama with a shave? Was it pre-recorded? Was it a speech? Was it black magic? Will it turn into a pumpkin if we really, really want it to? After dropping not hundreds, but thousands of bombs on Baghdad, when a marketplace was mistakenly blown up and civilians killed - a US army spokesman implied that the Iraqis were blowing themselves up! "They're using very old stock. Their missiles go up and come down." If so, may we ask how this squares with the accusation that the Iraqi regime is a paid-up member of the Axis of Evil and a threat to world peace? When the Arab TV station al-Jazeera shows civilian casualties it's denounced as "emotive" Arab propaganda aimed at orchestrating hostility towards the "Allies", as though Iraqis are dying only in order to make the "Allies" look bad. Even French television has come in for some stick for similar reasons. But the awed, breathless footage of aircraft carriers, stealth bombers and cruise missiles arcing across the desert sky on American and British TV is described as the "terrible beauty" of war. When invading American soldiers (from the army "that's only here to help") are taken prisoner and shown on Iraqi TV, George Bush says it violates the Geneva convention and "exposes the evil at the heart of the regime". But it is entirely acceptable for US television stations to show the hundreds of prisoners being held by the US government in Guantanamo Bay, kneeling on the ground with their hands tied behind their backs, blinded with opaque goggles and with earphones clamped on their ears, to ensure complete visual and aural deprivation. When questioned about the treatment of these prisoners, US Government officials don't deny that they're being being ill-treated. They deny that they're "prisoners of war"! They call them "unlawful combatants", implying that their ill-treatment is legitimate! (So what's the party line on the massacre of prisoners in Mazar-e-Sharif, Afghanistan? Forgive and forget? And what of the prisoner tortured to death by the special forces at the Bagram airforce base? Doctors have formally called it homicide.) When the "Allies" bombed the Iraqi television station (also, incidentally, a contravention of the Geneva convention), there was vulgar jubilation in the American media. In fact Fox TV had been lobbying for the attack for a while. It was seen as a righteous blow against Arab propaganda. But mainstream American and British TV continue to advertise themselves as "balanced" when their propaganda has achieved hallucinatory levels. Why should propaganda be the exclusive preserve of the western media? Just because they do it better? Western journalists "embedded" with troops are given the status of heroes reporting from the frontlines of war. Non-"embedded" journalists (such as the BBC's Rageh Omaar, reporting from besieged and bombed Baghdad, witnessing, and clearly affected by the sight of bodies of burned children and wounded people) are undermined even before they begin their reportage: "We have to tell you that he is being monitored by the Iraqi authorities." Increasingly, on British and American TV, Iraqi soldiers are being referred to as "militia" (ie: rabble). One BBC correspondent portentously referred to them as "quasi-terrorists". Iraqi defence is "resistance" or worse still, "pockets of resistance", Iraqi military strategy is deceit. (The US government bugging the phone lines of UN security council delegates, reported by the Observer, is hard-headed pragmatism.) Clearly for the "Allies", the only morally acceptable strategy the Iraqi army can pursue is to march out into the desert and be bombed by B-52s or be mowed down by machine-gun fire. Anything short of that is cheating. And now we have the siege of Basra. About a million and a half people, 40 per cent of them children. Without clean water, and with very little food. We're still waiting for the legendary Shia "uprising", for the happy hordes to stream out of the city and rain roses and hosannahs on the "liberating" army. Where are the hordes? Don't they know that television productions work to tight schedules? (It may well be that if Saddam's regime falls there will be dancing on the streets of Basra. But then, if the Bush regime were to fall, there would be dancing on the streets the world over.) After days of enforcing hunger and thirst on the citizens of Basra, the "Allies" have brought in a few trucks of food and water and positioned them tantalisingly on the outskirts of the city. Desperate people flock to the trucks and fight each other for food. (The water we hear, is being sold. To revitalise the dying economy, you understand.) On top of the trucks, desperate photographers fought each other to get pictures of desperate people fighting each other for food. Those pictures will go out through photo agencies to newspapers and glossy magazines that pay extremely well. Their message: The messiahs are at hand, distributing fishes and loaves. As of July last year the delivery of $5.4bn worth of supplies to Iraq was blocked by the Bush/Blair Pair. It didn't really make the news. But now under the loving caress of live TV, 450 tonnes of humanitarian aid - a minuscule fraction of what's actually needed (call it a script prop) - arrived on a British ship, the "Sir Galahad". Its arrival in the port of Umm Qasr merited a whole day of live TV broadcasts. Barf bag, anyone? Nick Guttmann, head of emergencies for Christian Aid, writing for the Independent on Sunday said that it would take 32 Sir Galahad's a day to match the amount of food Iraq was receiving before the bombing began. We oughtn't to be surprised though. It's old tactics. They've been at it for years. Consider this moderate proposal by John McNaughton from the Pentagon Papers, published during the Vietnam war: "Strikes at population targets (per se) are likely not only to create a counterproductive wave of revulsion abroad and at home, but greatly to increase the risk of enlarging the war with China or the Soviet Union. Destruction of locks and dams, however - if handled right - might ... offer promise. It should be studied. Such destruction does not kill or drown people. By shallow-flooding the rice, it leads after time to widespread starvation (more than a million?) unless food is provided - which we could offer to do 'at the conference table'." Times haven't changed very much. The technique has evolved into a doctrine. It's called "Winning Hearts and Minds". So, here's the moral maths as it stands: 200,000 Iraqis estimated to have been killed in the first Gulf war. Hundreds of thousands dead because of the economic sanctions. (At least that lot has been saved from Saddam Hussein.) More being killed every day. Tens of thousands of US soldiers who fought the 1991 war officially declared "disabled" by a disease called the Gulf war syndrome, believed in part to be caused by exposure to depleted uranium. It hasn't stopped the "Allies" from continuing to use depleted uranium. And now this talk of bringing the UN back into the picture. But that old UN girl - it turns out that she just ain't what she was cracked up to be. She's been demoted (although she retains her high salary). Now she's the world's janitor. She's the Philippino cleaning lady, the Indian jamadarni, the postal bride from Thailand, the Mexican household help, the Jamaican au pair. She's employed to clean other peoples' shit. She's used and abused at will. Despite Blair's earnest submissions, and all his fawning, Bush has made it clear that the UN will play no independent part in the administration of postwar Iraq. The US will decide who gets those juicy "reconstruction" contracts. But Bush has appealed to the international community not to "politicise" the issue of humanitarian aid. On the March 28, after Bush called for the immediate resumption of the UN's oil for food programme, the UN security council voted unanimously for the resolution. This means that everybody agrees that Iraqi money (from the sale of Iraqi oil) should be used to feed Iraqi people who are starving because of US led sanctions and the illegal US-led war. Contracts for the "reconstruction" of Iraq we're told, in discussions on the business news, could jump-start the world economy. It's funny how the interests of American corporations are so often, so successfully and so deliberately confused with the interests of the world economy. While the American people will end up paying for the war, oil companies, weapons manufacturers, arms dealers, and corporations involved in "reconstruction" work will make direct gains from the war. Many of them are old friends and former employers of the Bush/ Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rice cabal. Bush has already asked Congress for $75bn. Contracts for "re-construction" are already being negotiated. The news doesn't hit the stands because much of the US corporate media is owned and managed by the same interests. Operation Iraqi Freedom, Tony Blair assures us is about returning Iraqi oil to the Iraqi people. That is, returning Iraqi oil to the Iraqi people via corporate multinationals. Like Shell, like Chevron, like Halliburton. Or are we missing the plot here? Perhaps Halliburton is actually an Iraqi company? Perhaps US vice-president Dick Cheney (who is a former director of Halliburton) is a closet Iraqi? As the rift between Europe and America deepens, there are signs that the world could be entering a new era of economic boycotts. CNN reported that Americans are emptying French wine into gutters, chanting, "We don't want your stinking wine." We've heard about the re-baptism of French fries. Freedom fries they're called now. There's news trickling in about Americans boycotting German goods. The thing is that if the fallout of the war takes this turn, it is the US who will suffer the most. Its homeland may be defended by border patrols and nuclear weapons, but its economy is strung out across the globe. Its economic outposts are exposed and vulnerable to attack in every direction. Already the internet is buzzing with elaborate lists of American and British government products and companies that should be boycotted. Apart from the usual targets, Coke, Pepsi and McDonald's - government agencies such as USAID, the British department for international development, British and American banks, Arthur Anderson, Merrill Lynch, American Express, corporations such as Bechtel, General Electric, and companies such as Reebok, Nike and Gap - could find themselves under siege. These lists are being honed and re fined by activists across the world. They could become a practical guide that directs and channels the amorphous, but growing fury in the world. Suddenly, the "inevitability" of the project of corporate globalisation is beginning to seem more than a little evitable. It's become clear that the war against terror is not really about terror, and the war on Iraq not only about oil. It's about a superpower's self-destructive impulse towards supremacy, stranglehold, global hegemony. The argument is being made that the people of Argentina and Iraq have both been decimated by the same process. Only the weapons used against them differ: In one case it's an IMF chequebook. In the other, cruise missiles. Finally, there's the matter of Saddam's arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. (Oops, nearly forgot about those!) In the fog of war - one thing's for sure - if Saddam 's regime indeed has weapons of mass destruction, it is showing an astonishing degree of responsibility and restraint in the teeth of extreme provocation. Under similar circumstances, (say if Iraqi troops were bombing New York and laying siege to Washington DC) could we expect the same of the Bush regime? Would it keep its thousands of nuclear warheads in their wrapping paper? What about its chemical and biological weapons? Its stocks of anthrax, smallpox and nerve gas? Would it? Excuse me while I laugh. In the fog of war we're forced to speculate: Either Saddam is an extremely responsible tyrant. Or - he simply does not possess weapons of mass destruction. Either way, regardless of what happens next, Iraq comes out of the argument smelling sweeter than the US government. So here's Iraq - rogue state, grave threat to world peace, paid-up member of the Axis of Evil. Here's Iraq, invaded, bombed, besieged, bullied, its sovereignty shat upon, its children killed by cancers, its people blown up on the streets. And here's all of us watching. CNN-BBC, BBC-CNN late into the night. Here's all of us, enduring the horror of the war, enduring the horror of the propaganda and enduring the slaughter of language as we know and understand it. Freedom now means mass murder (or, in the US, fried potatoes). When someone says "humanitarian aid" we automatically go looking for induced starvation. "Embedded" I have to admit, is a great find. It's what it sounds like. And what about "arsenal of tactics?" Nice! In most parts of the world, the invasion of Iraq is being seen as a racist war. The real danger of a racist war unleashed by racist regimes is that it engenders racism in everybody - perpetrators, victims, spectators. It sets the parameters for the debate, it lays out a grid for a particular way of thinking. There is a tidal wave of hatred for the US rising from the ancient heart of the world. In Africa, Latin America, Asia, Europe, Australia. I encounter it every day. Sometimes it comes from the most unlikely sources. Bankers, businessmen, yuppie students, and they bring to it all the crassness of their conservative, illiberal politics. That absurd inability to separate governments from people: America is a nation of morons, a nation of murderers, they say, (with the same carelessness with which they say, "All Muslims are terrorists"). Even in the grotesque universe of racist insult, the British make their entry as add-ons. Arse-lickers, they're called. Suddenly, I, who have been vilified for being "anti-American" and "anti-west", find myself in the extraordinary position of defending the people of America. And Britain. Those who descend so easily into the pit of racist abuse would do well to remember the hundreds of thousands of American and British citizens who protested against their country's stockpile of nuclear weapons. And the thousands of American war resisters who forced their government to withdraw from Vietnam. They should know that the most scholarly, scathing, hilarious critiques of the US government and the "American way of life" comes from American citizens. And that the funniest, most bitter condemnation of their prime minister comes from the British media. Finally they should remember that right now, hundreds of thousands of British and American citizens are on the streets protesting the war. The Coalition of the Bullied and Bought consists of governments, not people. More than one third of America's citizens have survived the relentless propaganda they've been subjected to, and many thousands are actively fighting their own government. In the ultra-patriotic climate that prevails in the US, that's as brave as any Iraqi fighting for his or her homeland. While the "Allies" wait in the desert for an uprising of Shia Muslims on the streets of Basra, the real uprising is taking place in hundreds of cities across the world. It has been the most spectacular display of public morality ever seen. Most courageous of all, are the hundreds of thousands of American people on the streets of America's great cities - Washington, New York, Chicago, San Francisco. The fact is that the only institution in the world today that is more powerful than the American government, is American civil society. American citizens have a huge responsibility riding on their shoulders. How can we not salute and support those who not only acknowledge but act upon that responsibility? They are our allies, our friends. At the end of it all, it remains to be said that dictators like Saddam Hussein, and all the other despots in the Middle East, in the central Asian republics, in Africa and Latin America, many of them installed, supported and financed by the US government, are a menace to their own people. Other than strengthening the hand of civil society (instead of weakening it as has been done in the case of Iraq), there is no easy, pristine way of dealing with them. (It's odd how those who dismiss the peace movement as utopian, don't hesitate to proffer the most absurdly dreamy reasons for going to war: to stamp out terrorism, install democracy, eliminate fascism, and most entertainingly, to "rid the world of evil-doers".) Regardless of what the propaganda machine tells us, these tin-pot dictators are not the greatest threat to the world. The real and pressing danger, the greatest threat of all is the locomotive force that drives the political and economic engine of the US government, currently piloted by George Bush. Bush-bashing is fun, because he makes such an easy, sumptuous target. It's true that he is a dangerous, almost suicidal pilot, but the machine he handles is far more dangerous than the man himself. Despite the pall of gloom that hangs over us today, I'd like to file a cautious plea for hope: in times of war, one wants one's weakest enemy at the helm of his forces. And President George W Bush is certainly that. Any other even averagely intelligent US president would have probably done the very same things, but would have managed to smoke-up the glass and confuse the opposition. Perhaps even carry the UN with him. Bush's tactless imprudence and his brazen belief that he can run the world with his riot squad, has done the opposite. He has achieved what writers, activists and scholars have striven to achieve for decades. He has exposed the ducts. He has placed on full public view the working parts, the nuts and bolts of the apocalyptic apparatus of the American empire. Now that the blueprint (The Ordinary Person's Guide to Empire) has been put into mass circulation, it could be disabled quicker than the pundits predicted. Bring on the spanners. http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,927712,00.html ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Save Smiley. Help put Messenger back in the office. http://us.click.yahoo.com/4PqtEC/anyFAA/i5gGAA/PMYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Unsubscribe or change your subscription options at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radical-science Join Radical Science: radical-science-subscribe@yahoogroups.com Archive: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radical-science/messages Human Nature Review: http://human-nature.com/ Human Nature Daily Review: http://human-nature.com/nibbs/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From geege at barrera.org Tue Apr 1 07:52:19 2003 From: geege at barrera.org (geege@barrera.org) Date: Thu Apr 3 13:43:49 2003 Subject: NYTimes.com Article: Self-Protection or Delusion? The Many Varieties of Paranoia Message-ID: <20030401125219.2D6E83507A@web38t.prvt.nytimes.com> This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by geege@barrera.org. I'm sending this for one person in particular on this list. You know who you are. 8-) gg geege@barrera.org Self-Protection or Delusion? The Many Varieties of Paranoia April 1, 2003 By RICHARD A. FRIEDMAN, M.D. "I am being harassed by the guy next door and I want him to stop," the woman in my office said with firm conviction. The man would leer at her in the elevator just to make her squirm, she said. But when I inquired further, she described a lingering feeling of being mistreated by people she said were jealous of her. She was even sure that someone had once tried to poison her. Then I asked a question that gave me a direct taste of her problem. Is it possible that you are mistaken? Her pleasant manner instantly shifted to icy contempt before she denounced me for implying that she was paranoid. Of course, she was right. And the unshakable nature of her belief was the clincher. Certainly none of her ideas were bizarre or impossible. People are harassed and envied all the time. But her absolute absence of doubt was what made her psychotic. She could not imagine being wrong. Probably no psychiatric term is bandied about as loosely as paranoia. But paranoia covers a broad terrain, from a stable personality trait to a symptom of severe mental illness. Paranoia may even confer an adaptive advantage in some instances. After all, someone who is always watching his back and is mindful that his peers are driven by self-interest is more likely to have a competitive edge when one is needed. In politics, mild paranoia is probably an asset; no politician could survive for long with a rosy and trusting view of the world. But there is a world of difference between having a paranoid streak and harboring a delusion. Some people, like my patient, develop a delusional disorder in middle or late life, having had no trace of paranoid thinking before. Their disorder is fairly rare but striking. These patients falsely believe that they are the objects of persecution, envy or even love. Yet they often function effectively at work and can superficially pass for normal in social settings. Ian McEwan's "Enduring Love" describes a man in the grip of a mistaken but unyielding belief that he is loved by a complete stranger whom he meets by chance. Celebrity stalkers often fall into this category. They insist that they are secretly loved by a powerful or famous figure. Clearly, there is more than a little self-importance at the heart of these delusions. Whether it is being persecuted or loved, it is all about being the center of attention. And all attempts to convince them that their beliefs are mistaken fail. Because they have no doubt about their delusions, they are immune to reason. The most common cause of paranoia is also the least understood by the public, schizophrenia. A chronic mental illness that is generally believed to affect 1 percent of Americans, schizophrenia is characterized by delusions, often paranoid in nature; hallucinations; and so-called negative symptoms that include social withdrawal and apathy. Contrary to popular notion, schizophrenia has nothing to do with split or multiple personality. It is thinking and perception, not personality, that are so disordered in schizophrenia. What is intriguing is that drugs can produce symptoms that mimic schizophrenia, and they have yielded clues about the neurobiology of psychosis. Cocaine and amphetamines, for example, flood the brain with the neurotransmitter dopamine, producing psychosis in vulnerable people. And the cocaine-induced delusions are easy to confuse with those of schizophrenia. Antipsychotic drugs alleviate psychosis by blocking dopamine receptors in important brain areas. In doing so, they normalize the excess dopamine activity in schizophrenia and stimulant-induced psychosis. Curiously, antipsychotic drugs, which are so effective in treating the paranoia of schizophrenia, are of limited use in delusional disorder. That suggests that the neurobiology of paranoia is diverse, just as the illnesses that produce it are. An intriguing clue to the origin of psychotic thinking comes from recent brain imaging studies. Dr. David Silbersweig and Dr. Jane Epstein at the New York Weill Cornell Center used PET scans to study schizophrenic patients who were having delusions and auditory hallucinations while their brains were being imaged. The paranoid subjects showed increased activity in the amygdala, a part of the brain involved in the emotional processing of fear and danger, not only in response to threatening words, but also to neutral words. Healthy people respond like this only in threatening situations. The implication is that the brain is responding to a nonexistent threat, at least in these paranoid schizophrenic subjects. It is like a faulty burglar alarm set off in the absence of an intruder. The paranoid patient is correctly responding to real brain activity that indicates danger, but those neural circuits have no good reason to be firing in the first place. To make matters worse, the schizophrenic subjects also showed decreased activity in the prefrontal cortex compared with healthy people. The prefrontal cortex serves an executive function, critically evaluating signals from brain regions and shaping responses to them. So in addition to having an overactive fear circuit, these paranoid subjects have an impaired ability to judge whether their fears are rational. Sure, paranoid people, like the rest of us, do occasionally have enemies. But if these imaging studies are replicated, the results will mean that the real enemies of paranoid people are their own brains. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/01/health/psychology/01BEHA.html?ex=1050201539&ei=1&en=d9feba5ae6b65cf5 HOW TO ADVERTISE --------------------------------- For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company From ejw at cse.ucsc.edu Thu Apr 3 14:04:17 2003 From: ejw at cse.ucsc.edu (Jim Whitehead) Date: Thu Apr 3 14:08:04 2003 Subject: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. In-Reply-To: <200304031422.32688.gtn@rbii.com> Message-ID: > On Thursday 03 April 2003 12:18 pm, Adam Rifkin wrote: > > http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/03/technology/circuits/03driv.html > > Hah. I built one of those by ordering the basic box at > caseoutlet.com added a disk, and a stick of memory. Hmm, so you spent about an hour spec'ing and buying the parts, 30 minutes to assemble it, and another 1.5 hours installing and configuring Linux, for a total of 3 hours to create this configuration from scratch. Since you're a very knowledgeable and talented person, your time is probably worth over $100/hr. So, you blew $300 of your time to replicate a device that only costs a $300-$500 dollars. Worse, you internalized the technical risk of your chosen configuration not working (all wireless cards work well under Linux, right? :-). By buying it from Martian, you would have externalized that risk. So, did you really get a bargain? - Jim From greg at endeavors.com Thu Apr 3 14:12:20 2003 From: greg at endeavors.com (Gregory Alan Bolcer) Date: Thu Apr 3 14:14:35 2003 Subject: RG: [radical-science] Mesopotamia. Babylon. The Tigris and Euphrates(fwd) Message-ID: <53109A46D4F58F458B18D009EAEEDC832617AC@mail.endeavorstech.com> > According to a New York Times/CBS News survey, 42 per cent of the American > public believes that Saddam Hussein is directly responsible for the September > 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. And an ABC news poll > says that 55 per cent of Americans believe that Saddam Hussein directly > supports al-Qaida. 87% of the world believe that Americans have more and easier access to real time information than any other country in the world due to the widespread availability of information technology and media. From Rohit at ics.uci.edu Thu Apr 3 13:37:39 2003 From: Rohit at ics.uci.edu (Rohit Khare) Date: Thu Apr 3 14:16:34 2003 Subject: LA Times fires photojournalist for photoshopping... Message-ID: <7E2EBD37-661C-11D7-AD1D-000393B4C2A6@ICS.uci.edu> from BONG, a fine list -- http://newsgorilla.blogspot.com > SOMEBODY THOUGHT THOSE TWO GUYS IN THE BACK AND THE ONE ON THE LEFT > LOOKED A LITTLE TOO MUCH LIKE JERRY GARCIA. The L.A. Times (well, > SOMEBODY has to be serious in Los Angeles!) published this correction: > "On Monday, March 31, the Los Angeles Times published a front-page > photograph that had been altered in violation of Times policy. > "The primary subject of the photo was a British soldier directing > Iraqi civilians to take cover from Iraqi fire on the outskirts of > Basra. > After publication, it was noticed that several civilians in the > background appear twice. The photographer, Brian Walski, reached by > telephone in southern Iraq, acknowledged that he had used his computer > to combine elements of two photographs, taken moments apart, in order > to > improve the composition. > "Times policy forbids altering the content of news photographs. > Because of the violation, Walski, a Times photographer since 1998, has > been dismissed from the staff." > See the photos here or at > From gtn at rbii.com Thu Apr 3 17:27:01 2003 From: gtn at rbii.com (Gavin Thomas Nicol) Date: Thu Apr 3 14:52:14 2003 Subject: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200304031727.01122.gtn@rbii.com> On Thursday 03 April 2003 05:04 pm, Jim Whitehead wrote: > So, did you really get a bargain? Not at all, but I know exactly what is on my network... including another one of those boxes hooked up to my TV with a WinTV card in it (an expensive TiVo :-)), and a nasty overheating Sumicon (give me an EZGO... oh, I already have one :-)). Yes, I could have bought them fully assembled, and probably cheaper overall, BUT the whole point is that I had fun doing it. Call it entertainment ;-) From kranenbu at xs4all.nl Thu Apr 3 13:06:47 2003 From: kranenbu at xs4all.nl (Rob van Kranenburg) Date: Thu Apr 3 15:54:48 2003 Subject: [irtheory] The Boomerang Effect In-Reply-To: <011301c2d5c1$35af98e0$cb59dd0c@insightbb.com> References: <011301c2d5c1$35af98e0$cb59dd0c@insightbb.com> Message-ID: Founder of the National Review, the conservative journal of opinion of which he was editor-in-chief until 1990, Buckley also worked as an influential political advisor and popular novelist. Buckley aptly described the effect of his National Review through his character Boris Bolgin in his spy novel Who's on First. "'Do you ever read the National Review, Jozsef?', asks Boris Bolgin, the chief of KGB counter intelligence for Western Europe, 'It is edited by this young bourgeois fanatic. Oh, how they cried about the repression of the counter-revolutionaries in Budapest! But the National Review it is also angry with the CIA for--I don't know; not starting up a Third World War, maybe? Last week--I always read the National Review, it makes me so funny mad--last week an editorial said'--he raised his head and appeared to quote from memory--'The attempted assassination of Sukarno last week had all the earmarks of a CIA operation. Everybody in the room was killed except Sukarno.'" http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/g1epc/bio/2419200148/p1/article.jhtml?term=enterprise+integration >yes, well the National Review is run by Buckley--an admitted CIA Agent. Once >CIA, always CIA. fab. >Francis A. Boyle -- web: http://simsim.rug.ac.be/staff/rob mail: kranenbu@xs4all.nl mobile: ++32 (0) 472 40 63 72 Call home first 0032 9 2333 853 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lair.xent.com/pipermail/fork/attachments/20030403/d78f68e4/attachment.htm From Adam at KnowNow.com Thu Apr 3 16:16:00 2003 From: Adam at KnowNow.com (Adam Rifkin) Date: Thu Apr 3 16:20:50 2003 Subject: [DaveNet] NY Times pulls back from the Web. Message-ID: <9C98E3ADB7D91044961ECE49C991253E05D0F0@othello.knownow.com> After Rohit spent all those hours resuscitating FoRK, you knew the balance of the universe would mock him some way. [Rohit told me I could complain about this to the list. Ok, here's my complaint: out of all the people Dave Winer sends this to, why did he have to include *ME* in the same mailblock as Rohit? I mean, mix it up a little... Keep me with people I barely know... :] If you FoRK NY Times bits, you have to include the relevant passage and not just the link so we have context when we find it Googling through the archive. No, wait, that's copyright violation. Dammit, where's transclusion when you need it? Thank goodness there's still http://www.syndic8.com/ for all my current news fixes... It will never mock me the way the New York Times does... -----Original Message----- From: DaveNet email [mailto:dave@scripting.com] Sent: Thu 4/3/2003 2:18 PM To: Peter Winer; Adam Rifkin; JuliePitta; Will Hearst -- Kleiner Perkins; Doug Mackenzie --Kleiner Perkins; EricKrugler; Tom Sherrard -- Microsoft; Ben Waldman; Charles Wiltgen; Jim Burger; Rohit Khare Subject: NY Times pulls back DaveNet essay, "NY Times pulls back", released on 4/3/2003; 5:21:29 PM Eastern. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------- ***Yin and yang Yesterday uncharacteristically good news [1] about Microsoft. Today, uncharacteristically bad news about the Microsoft of the news business: The New York Times. Until today the Times archive was perfect. If you pointed to a Times article from an essay or a weblog post, as I have for almost ten years, the link would continue to work, year after year. Today that ended. All my links into the NY Times archive that are older than 30 days are broken. I suspected this day would come, eventually. Advertising doesn't pay for Web publications. It probably doesn't pay for print pubs either anymore. The business model for news is gyrating wildly. So much uncertainty. But one thing /is/ certain, the Times will be missed on the Web. Dave Winer [1] http://davenet.userland.com/2003/04/02/microsoftSupportsRss ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------- (c) Copyright 1994-2003, Dave Winer. http://davenet.userland.com/. Founder, UserLand Software, Inc; Berkman Fellow, Harvard Law School. ---- aDaM aT KNoWNoW DoT CoM, purveyor of hacky thoughts Hmm, so you spent about an hour spec'ing and buying the parts, 30 minutes to assemble it, and another 1.5 hours installing and configuring Linux, for a total of 3 hours to create this configuration from scratch.... Since you're a very knowledgeable and talented person, your time is probably worth over $100/hr. So, you blew $300 of your time to replicate a device that only costs $300-$500 dollars. Worse, you internalized the technical risk of your chosen configuration not working (all wireless cards work well under Linux, right? :-). By buying it from Martian, you would have externalized that risk. So, did you really get a bargain? -- http://www.xent.com/pipermail/fork/2003-April/019660.html [Hey, is Dossick paying Jim to do marketing for him?] From sdossick at yahoo.com Thu Apr 3 17:08:30 2003 From: sdossick at yahoo.com (Steve Dossick) Date: Thu Apr 3 17:08:57 2003 Subject: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. Message-ID: On Thursday 03 April 2003 05:27 pm, Gavin Thomas Nicol wrote: >On Thursday 03 April 2003 05:04 pm, Jim Whitehead wrote: >> So, did you really get a bargain? >Not at all, but I know exactly what is on my network... including another one >of those boxes hooked up to my TV with a WinTV card in it (an expensive TiVo >:-)), and a nasty overheating Sumicon (give me an EZGO... oh, I already have >one :-)). > >Yes, I could have bought them fully assembled, and probably cheaper overall, >BUT the whole point is that I had fun doing it. Call it entertainment ;-) More power to ya. Suffice it to say, most of our orders aren't coming from folks who think 'entertainment' == 'linux installfest' ;) But for all those FoRKers who do like installing linux on small hardware, I have a job for you :) -s P.S. Kit coming out next week -- supply your own hard drive, have the entertainment of installing our os+software onto it (totally web based) P.P.S. No, I'm not paying Jim to do marketing :) But I might give free shipping to anyone who puts 'FoRK' in the comment field on our order form :) From gtn at rbii.com Fri Apr 4 00:20:39 2003 From: gtn at rbii.com (Gavin Thomas Nicol) Date: Thu Apr 3 21:24:09 2003 Subject: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200304040020.39050.gtn@rbii.com> On Thursday 03 April 2003 08:08 pm, Steve Dossick wrote: > More power to ya. Suffice it to say, most of our orders aren't coming from > folks who think 'entertainment' == 'linux installfest' ;) The linux OS install now is so trivial that it's hardly even fun... getting the wireless and TV cards going was entertaining though... How's business for these things? Seems like there is a clearly emerging market for such devices in the home. The ideal would be to have one box be the PVR/File Server/Firewall/Access Point for the home... kind of what I'm planning to build in my spare (hah!) time. From sdossick at yahoo.com Thu Apr 3 22:50:50 2003 From: sdossick at yahoo.com (Steve Dossick) Date: Thu Apr 3 22:50:52 2003 Subject: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. In-Reply-To: <200304040020.39050.gtn@rbii.com> Message-ID: > From: Gavin Thomas Nicol > > How's business for these things? Seems like there is a clearly emerging market > for such devices in the home. The ideal would be to have one box be the > PVR/File Server/Firewall/Access Point for the home... kind of what I'm > planning to build in my spare (hah!) time. Business is pretty good. There's lots of amazing things you could do with a cheap wireless networked cpu in your house (with some decent local storage)...all the way from home automation to personalized browsing (automated culling of RSS feeds into a personalized electronic newspaper), media handling (PVR stuff, audio stuff, digital picture stuff) etc etc. The real key is to keep it simple enough that someone like my father can use it right out of the box. It also needs to stay cheap enough that folks will buy it without thinking too hard about it. The future's already here, it's just too expensive right now ;) -s From khare at alumni.caltech.edu Fri Apr 4 04:32:37 2003 From: khare at alumni.caltech.edu (khare@alumni.caltech.edu) Date: Fri Apr 4 01:38:49 2003 Subject: NYTimes.com Article: This Store Sells Rice Pudding. Nothing Else. Message-ID: <20030404093237.A450035040@web38t.prvt.nytimes.com> This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by khare@alumni.caltech.edu. I love New York!! (proud owner of a new New Yorker New Yorkistan shower curtain! :-) khare@alumni.caltech.edu This Store Sells Rice Pudding. Nothing Else. April 2, 2003 By FRED A. BERNSTEIN RICE pudding is comfort food. But not for Peter Moceo. "Ask my wife," said Mr. Moceo, 43. "I don't sleep; I'm up all night thinking about rice pudding." What should be the perfect palliative for a city on edge has become, for Mr. Moceo, an obsession. Yesterday, after more than two years of tossing and turning, he opened what is probably the world's only rice pudding parlor. Mr. Moceo, who grew up in Bensonhurst, in Brooklyn, and now lives in the Trump Tower, named the place Rice to Riches. In the shop's basement kitchen at 37 Spring Street between Mulberry and Mott Streets, Jemal Edwards, once the pastry chef at Montrachet and Nobu, is busy turning out 18 flavors, from pineapple-basil to pistachio-sage. Upstairs, at a counter shaped like a giant grain of rice, customers pay $4.50 for eight-ounce portions. Exotic toppings (including one made with Vietnamese pandan rice flakes, fried with cardamom, lemon grass and ginger) add 25 cents. For the opening-day crowd, there was a Portuguese special with cinnamon, lemon and port-soaked currants. No detail was too minor to keep Mr. Moceo awake. He designed plastic dishes to match the flavors. "Your limes and your pistachios go here," he said, pointing to a stack of green containers. He came up with ominous flavor names like Coffee Collapse, Sesame Survivor and Chocolate Cherry Crime Scene. "I spent a lot of time," he said, "looking for words that would go together." The store's design, with its impressive glass portal (also shaped like a grain of rice) and space-agey interior of orange and white Lucite, consumed Mr. Moceo. (For months, a sign outside apologized for delays, promising "fast food, slow construction.") The shop's flat-screen televisions play videos of Mr. Moceo's seven-pound white Maltese, Fidget. Scenes that Mr. Moceo had hoped to include, with Fidget battling larger dogs for rice pudding treats, were cut when it became clear that Fidget couldn't act. Mr. Moceo, who said he once owned a restaurant called Bally-hoo's in Smithtown, N.Y., originally wanted to open a sit-down restaurant featuring only rice dishes. After struggling with the concept for months, he said, he flew to Italy to relax. As he ate intensely flavored desserts in Florence's stylish gelaterias, inspiration struck. But when he got back to New York and began researching rice pudding recipes, he said, "my friends didn't understand where I was going with this." Worse, "landlords refused to rent to me, because they didn't see how I could pay the rent selling rice pudding." Mr. Moceo, who declined to say how much he has spent on the project, said it was "less than you'd think - I did most of the work myself." He had "no partners, no investors." He said he hopes to sell 400 to 500 portions of rice pudding a day. "Everyone," he said inaccurately, "loves rice pudding." He then amended his statement to say that anyone who dislikes rice pudding has probably had only the diner version, which he said lacks both taste and texture. His pudding is made with firm-grained sushi rice and expensive flavorings like Boyajian lemon oil, which is made with 66 lemons per ounce. "The main thing for Pete is getting the flavors super-intense," Mr. Edwards said. In an early tasting, Chocolate Cherry Crime Scene had the texture of molten lava and the taste of a chocolate cherry cordial. Bottomless Pear packed a jolt of anise, and the mix of textures - tiny grains of pear with larger grains of rice - gave the tongue a workout. Mr. Moceo spent more than a year building the shop's elaborate kitchen, designed to produce nothing but rice pudding. "All of this equipment, and you can't even toast an English muffin," sighed Mr. Edwards. Working at a long row of single-burner stoves, Mr. Edwards brought gallons of sweetened and salted milk to a boil in an oversize saucepan called a rondo. "We're ready for rice," he told an assistant, who began pouring about four pounds of parboiled sushi rice into the pan. Mr. Edwards estimated that it would take 38 minutes for the rice to cook, but, he said, "you can't predict exactly; you have to wait until it has just the right jiggle." When the jiggle was right, Mr. Edwards folded cream and eggs into the mixture, creating what he calls rice pudding base. Later, he would add the ingredients for Sesame Survivor, which include light brown sugar, dark brown sugar and Joyva tahini paste. Other flavors require fruit reductions. For these, Mr. Edwards depends on a large kitchen scale and a calculator; he knows, for example, that a raspberry mixture is done when it is down to precisely 12.91 kilograms. But the rice has to cooperate. "Sometimes it will puff up, and sometimes it won't, and you can't quite figure out why," Mr. Edwards said. When oils coat grains of rice, they will not expand properly, he said. So oily ingredients are added only after the rice is cooked. The final step is folding in whipped cream. "I had a suspicion that rice wasn't easy to work with," Mr. Edwards said, "because when I was at Nobu, I would see apprentice chefs spend months doing nothing but rice." The finished pudding is moved to a Traulsen blast chiller, which cools it to 40 degrees in 40 minutes, Mr. Moceo said. Then it is stashed in a walk-in refrigerator as big as some studio apartments. The shop serves the puddings cold, but they can be warmed in a microwave on request. Mr. Edwards, now 36, entered the world of rice pudding in 2001, when Mr. Moceo was trying out recipes with a succession of chefs in a commercial kitchen he had rented on 11th Avenue. Nothing was off limits, including vinegars and mustards. Some of those flavors will reappear as specials, Mr. Moceo said. He is planning pumpkin rice pudding for Halloween and Champagne rice pudding for New Year's Eve. Already, Mr. Moceo has plans to open four more stores in Manhattan, and to supply restaurants through a larger kitchen than the one on Spring Street. And he plans to expand his menu, slightly. "I have some really good ideas for pairing teas with rice puddings," Mr. Moceo said. Yesterday, several customers noted that they were on their way to Mass for Lent. "Nobody gives up rice pudding for Lent," Mr. Moceo said. "Not yet." http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/02/dining/02RICE.html?ex=1050448757&ei=1&en=4394282d8f91f1d1 HOW TO ADVERTISE --------------------------------- For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company From eugen at leitl.org Fri Apr 4 12:19:58 2003 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Fri Apr 4 02:12:21 2003 Subject: Chomsky: "Iraq is a trial run" (fwd) Message-ID: From: Tyler Durden To: cypherpunks@minder.net Subject: Chomsky: "Iraq is a trial run" What Chomsky says below is no suprise to most of those on this list, left/right/other. What IS of interest is that fact that a universal consensus seems to be emerging about the US's role in the world, and Chomsky articulates this sentiment. -TD (from www.zmag.org) IRAQ Noam Chomsky , University Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, founder of the modern science of linguistics and political activist, is a powerhouse of anti-imperialist activism in the United States today. On March 21, a crowded and typical - and uniquely Chomskyan - day of political protest and scientific academic research, he spoke from his office for half an hour to V. K. Ramachandran on the current attack on Iraq. V. K. Ramachandran :Does the present aggression on Iraq represent a continuation of United States' international policy in recent years or a qualitatively new stage in that policy? Noam Chomsky : It represents a significantly new phase. It is not without precedent, but significantly new nevertheless. This should be seen as a trial run. Iraq is seen as an extremely easy and totally defenceless target. It is assumed, probably correctly, that the society will collapse, that the soldiers will go in and that the U.S. will be in control, and will establish the regime of its choice and military bases. They will then go on to the harder cases that will follow. The next case could be the Andean region, it could be Iran, it could be others. The trial run is to try and establish what the U.S. calls a "new norm" in international relations. The new norm is "preventive war" (notice that new norms are established only by the United States). So, for example, when India invaded East Pakistan to terminate horrendous massacres, it did not establish a new norm of humanitarian intervention, because India is the wrong country, and besides, the U.S. was strenuously opposed to that action. This is not pre-emptive war; there is a crucial difference. Pre-emptive war has a meaning, it means that, for example, if planes are flying across the Atlantic to bomb the United States, the United States is permitted to shoot them down even before they bomb and may be permitted to attack the air bases from which they came. Pre-emptive war is a response to ongoing or imminent attack. The doctrine of preventive war is totally different; it holds that the United States - alone, since nobody else has this right - has the right to attack any country that it claims to be a potential challenge to it. So if the United States claims, on whatever grounds, that someone may sometime threaten it, then it can attack them. The doctrine of preventive war was announced explicitly in the National Strategy Report last September. It sent shudders around the world, including through the U.S. establishment, where, I might say, opposition to the war is unusually high. The National Strategy Report said, in effect, that the U.S. will rule the world by force, which is the dimension - the only dimension - in which it is supreme. Furthermore, it will do so for the indefinite future, because if any potential challenge arises to U.S. domination, the U.S. will destroy it before it becomes a challenge. This is the first exercise of that doctrine. If it succeeds on these terms, as it presumably will, because the target is so defenceless, then international lawyers and Western intellectuals and others will begin to talk about a new norm in international affairs. It is important to establish such a norm if you expect to rule the world by force for the foreseeable future. This is not without precedent, but it is extremely unusual. I shall mention one precedent, just to show how narrow the spectrum is. In 1963, Dean Acheson, who was a much respected elder statesman and senior Adviser of the Kennedy Administration, gave an important talk to the American Society of International Law, in which he justified the U. S. attacks against Cuba. The attack by the Kennedy Administration on Cuba was large-scale international terrorism and economic warfare. The timing was interesting - it was right after the Missile Crisis, when the world was very close to a terminal nuclear war. In his speech, Acheson said that "no legal issue arises when the United States responds to challenges to its position, prestige or authority", or words approximating that. That is also a statement of the Bush doctrine. Although Acheson was an important figure, what he said had not been official government policy in the post-War period. It now stands as official policy and this is the first illustration of it. It is intended to provide a precedent for the future. Such "norms" are established only when a Western power does something, not when others do. That is part of the deep racism of Western culture, going back through centuries of imperialism and so deep that it is unconscious. So I think this war is an important new step, and is intended to be. Ramachandran :Is it also a new phase in that the U. S. has not been able to carry others with it? Chomsky : That is not new. In the case of the Vietnam War, for example, the United States did not even try to get international support. Nevertheless, you are right in that this is unusual. This is a case in which the United States was compelled for political reasons to try to force the world to accept its position and was not able to, which is quite unusual. Usually, the world succumbs. Ramachandran :So does it represent a "failure of diplomacy" or a redefinition of diplomacy itself? Chomsky : I wouldn't call it diplomacy at all - it's a failure of coercion. Compare it with the first Gulf War. In the first Gulf War, the U.S. coerced the Security Council into accepting its position, although much of the world opposed it. NATO went along, and the one country in the Security Council that did not - Yemen - was immediately and severely punished. In any legal system that you take seriously, coerced judgments are considered invalid, but in the international affairs conducted by the powerful, coerced judgments are fine - they are called diplomacy. What is interesting about this case is that the coercion did not work. There were countries - in fact, most of them - who stubbornly maintained the position of the vast majority of their populations. The most dramatic case is Turkey. Turkey is a vulnerable country, vulnerable to U.S. punishment and inducements. Nevertheless, the new government, I think to everyone's surprise, did maintain the position of about 90 per cent of its population. Turkey is bitterly condemned for that here, just as France and Germany are bitterly condemned because they took the position of the overwhelming majority of their populations. The countries that are praised are countries like Italy and Spain, whose leaders agreed to follow orders from Washington over the opposition of maybe 90 per cent of their populations. That is another new step. I cannot think of another case where hatred and contempt for democracy have so openly been proclaimed, not just by the government, but also by liberal commentators and others. There is now a whole literature trying to explain why France, Germany, the so-called "old Europe", and Turkey and others are trying to undermine the United States. It is inconceivable to the pundits that they are doing so because they take democracy seriously and they think that when the overwhelming majority of a population has an opinion, a government ought to follow it. That is real contempt for democracy, just as what has happened at the United Nations is total contempt for the international system. In fact there are now calls - from The Wall Street Journal ,people in Government and others - to disband the United Nations. Fear of the United States around the world is extraordinary. It is so extreme that it is even being discussed in the mainstream media. The cover story of the upcoming issue of Newsweek is about why the world is so afraid of the United States. The Post had a cover story about this a few weeks ago. Of course this is considered to be the world's fault, that there is something wrong with the world with which we have to deal somehow, but also something that has to be recognised. Ramachandran :The idea that Iraq represents any kind of clear and present danger is, of course, without any substance at all. Chomsky : Nobody pays any attention to that accusation, except, interestingly, the population of the United States. In the last few months, there has been a spectacular achievement of government-media propaganda, very visible in the polls. The international polls show that support for the war is higher in the United States than in other countries. That is, however, quite misleading, because if you look a little closer, you find that the United States is also different in another respect from the rest of the world. Since September 2002, the United States is the only country in the world where 60 per cent of the population believes that Iraq is an imminent threat - something that people do not believe even in Kuwait or Iran. Furthermore, about 50 per cent of the population now believes that Iraq was responsible for the attack on the World Trade Centre. This has happened since September 2002. In fact, after the September 11 attack, the figure was about 3 per cent. Government-media propaganda has managed to raise that to about 50 per cent. Now if people genuinely believe that Iraq has carried out major terrorist attacks against the United States and is planning to do so again, well, in that case people will support the war. This has happened, as I said, after September 2002. September 2002 is when the government-media campaign began and also when the mid-term election campaign began. The Bush Administration would have been smashed in the election if social and economic issues had been in the forefront, but it managed to suppress those issues in favour of security issues - and people huddle under the umbrella of power. This is exactly the way the country was run in the 1980s. Remember that these are almost the same people as in the Reagan and the senior Bush Administrations. Right through the 1980s they carried out domestic policies that were harmful to the population and which, as we know from extensive polls, the people opposed. But they managed to maintain control by frightening the people. So the Nicaraguan Army was two days' march from Texas and about to conquer the United States, and the airbase in Granada was one from which the Russians would bomb us. It was one thing after another, every year, every one of them ludicrous. The Reagan Administration actually declared a national Emergency in 1985 because of the threat to the security of the United States posed by the Government of Nicaragua. If somebody were watching this from Mars, they would not know whether to laugh or to cry. They are doing exactly the same thing now, and will probably do something similar for the presidential campaign. There will have to be a new dragon to slay, because if the Administration lets domestic issues prevail, it is in deep trouble. Ramachandran :You have written that this war of aggression has dangerous consequences with respect to international terrorism and the threat of nuclear war. Chomsky : I cannot claim any originality for that opinion. I am just quoting the CIA and other intelligence agencies and virtually every specialist in international affairs and terrorism. Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy , the study by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the high-level Hart-Rudman Commission on terrorist threats to the United States all agree that it is likely to increase terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The reason is simple: partly for revenge, but partly just for self-defence. There is no other way to protect oneself from U.S. attack. In fact, the United States is making the point very clearly, and is teaching the world an extremely ugly lesson. Compare North Korea and Iraq. Iraq is defenceless and weak; in fact, the weakest regime in the region. While there is a horrible monster running it, it does not pose a threat to anyone else. North Korea, on the other hand, does pose a threat. North Korea, however, is not attacked for a very simple reason: it has a deterrent. It has a massed artillery aimed at Seoul, and if the United States attacks it, it can wipe out a large part of South Korea. So the United States is telling the countries of the world: if you are defenceless, we are going to attack you when we want, but if you have a deterrent, we will back off, because we only attack defenceless targets. In other words, it is telling countries that they had better develop a terrorist network and weapons of mass destruction or some other credible deterrent; if not, they are vulnerable to "preventive war". For that reason alone, this war is likely to lead to the proliferation of both terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. Ramachandran :How do you think the U.S. will manage the human - and humanitarian - consequences of the war? Chomsky : No one knows, of course. That is why honest and decent people do not resort to violence - because one simply does not know. The aid agencies and medical groups that work in Iraq have pointed out that the consequences can be very severe. Everyone hopes not, but it could affect up to millions of people. To undertake violence when there is even such a possibility is criminal. There is already - that is, even before the war - a humanitarian catastrophe. By conservative estimates, ten years of sanctions have killed hundreds of thousands of people. If there were any honesty, the U.S. would pay reparations just for the sanctions. The situation is similar to the bombing of Afghanistan, of which you and I spoke when the bombing there was in its early stages. It was obvious the United States was never going to investigate the consequences. Ramachandran :Or invest the kind of money that was needed. Chomsky : Oh no. First, the question is not asked, so no one has an idea of what the consequences of the bombing were for most of the country. Then almost nothing comes in. Finally, it is out of the news, and no one remembers it any more. In Iraq, the United States will make a show of humanitarian reconstruction and will put in a regime that it will call democratic, which means that it follows Washington's orders. Then it will forget about what happens later, and will go on to the next one. Ramachandran :How have the media lived up to their propaganda-model reputation this time? Chomsky : Right now it is cheerleading for the home team. Look at CNN, which is disgusting - and it is the same everywhere. That is to be expected in wartime; the media are worshipful of power. More interesting is what happened in the build-up to war. The fact that government-media propaganda was able to convince the people that Iraq is an imminent threat and that Iraq was responsible for September 11 is a spectacular achievement and, as I said, was accomplished in about four months. If you ask people in the media about this, they will say, "Well, we never said that," and it is true, they did not. There was never a statement that Iraq is going to invade the United States or that it carried out the World Trade Centre attack. It was just insinuated, hint after hint, until they finally got people to believe it. Ramachandran :Look at the resistance, though. Despite the propaganda, despite the denigration of the United Nations, they haven't quite carried the day. Chomsky : You never know. The United Nations is in a very hazardous position. The United States might move to dismantle it. I don't really expect that, but at least to diminish it, because when it isn't following orders, of what use is it? Ramachandran :Noam, you have seen movements of resistance to imperialism over a long period - Vietnam, Central America, Gulf War I. What are your impressions of the character, sweep and depth of the present resistance to U.S. aggression? We take great heart in the extraordinary mobilisations all over the world. Chomsky : Oh, that is correct; there is just nothing like it. Opposition throughout the world is enormous and unprecedented, and the same is true of the United States. Yesterday, for example, I was in demonstrations in downtown Boston, right around the Boston Common. It is not the first time I have been there. The first time I participated in a demonstration there at which I was to speak was in October 1965. That was four years after the United States had started bombing South Vietnam. Half of South Vietnam had been destroyed and the war had been extended to North Vietnam. We could not have a demonstration because it was physically attacked, mostly by students, with the support of the liberal press and radio, who denounced these people who were daring to protest against an American war. On this occasion, however, there was a massive protest before the war was launched officially and once again on the day it was launched - with no counter-demonstrators. That is a radical difference. And if it were not for the fear factor that I mentioned, there would be much more opposition. The government knows that it cannot carry out long-term aggression and destruction as in Vietnam because the population will not tolerate it. There is only one way to fight a war now. First of all, pick a much weaker enemy, one that is defenceless. Then build it up in the propaganda system as either about to commit aggression or as an imminent threat. Next, you need a lightning victory. An important leaked document of the first Bush Administration in 1989 described how the U.S. would have to fight war. It said that the U.S. had to fight much weaker enemies, and that victory must be rapid and decisive, as public support will quickly erode. It is no longer like the 1960s, when a war could be fought for years with no opposition at all. In many ways, the activism of the 1960s and subsequent years has simply made a lot of the world, including this country, much more civilised in many domains. _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail From owen at permafrost.net Fri Apr 4 08:17:10 2003 From: owen at permafrost.net (Owen Byrne) Date: Fri Apr 4 04:19:06 2003 Subject: Chomsky: "Iraq is a trial run" (fwd) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E8D77C6.6020400@permafrost.net> In my opinion, the Uruguay round of GATT/WTO was the trial run - same modus operandi - make a show of international cooperation in order to sabotage international institutions while plannning to act unilaterally. The same "rules only apply to other countries" mentality. Now - Geneva Convention. Then - Dumping. Owen From eh at mad.scientist.com Fri Apr 4 09:59:37 2003 From: eh at mad.scientist.com (Eirikur Hallgrimsson) Date: Fri Apr 4 07:06:09 2003 Subject: The "Birdhouse In Your Sould" distribution system In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200304040959.37456.eh@mad.scientist.com> On Thursday 03 April 2003 11:28 am, Tom wrote: > The bird feeder in front of my house is now a distribution node for > Knoppix ver 3.2 cds packaged in zip lock baggies along with a PTP sticker > as an extra surprise. I am using this to distribute the cds to memebers Go, Tom! Knopix is very cool. Boot a real live useful, X-Window system/KDE workstation from a CDROM without touchy a hair on the chinny-chin-chin of your precious hard drive. It's an actual useful distro on a CDROM. You can burn your own additional CDROM or use a floppy with it for persistant data. www.knoppix.org It's a NICE portable toolset. Much lighter than a laptop. It sits in my briefcase, taking up no room, but adding a sense of studly empowerment, on those days when toting a full-function laptop seems unreasonable. This guy (Klaus Knopper ) is really talented (or maybe just insanely dedicated, or both). It's a wonder why this hasn't been done before, but there were a lot of fiddly technical hurdles. A lot. He deserves accolades. Eirikur From sdossick at yahoo.com Fri Apr 4 07:27:36 2003 From: sdossick at yahoo.com (Steve Dossick) Date: Fri Apr 4 07:27:36 2003 Subject: The "Birdhouse In Your Sould" distribution system In-Reply-To: <200304040959.37456.eh@mad.scientist.com> Message-ID: Wow, that's pretty cool -- for our Martian NetDrive "Kit" product, to be released next week, we include a CD with the unit. The CD boots up on the NetDrive, starts a web server and ramdisk samba share, and lets you copy a Martian NetDrive OS image onto your favorite local hard drive. I can certainly attest to the fact that getting Linux running in a read-only environment with non-trivial server software on top is not my idea of entertainment :) -s > From: Eirikur Hallgrimsson > Organization: Electric Brain > Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 09:59:37 -0500 > To: FoRK@xent.com > Subject: Re: The "Birdhouse In Your Sould" distribution system > > On Thursday 03 April 2003 11:28 am, Tom wrote: >> The bird feeder in front of my house is now a distribution node for >> Knoppix ver 3.2 cds packaged in zip lock baggies along with a PTP sticker >> as an extra surprise. I am using this to distribute the cds to memebers > > Go, Tom! > > Knopix is very cool. Boot a real live useful, X-Window system/KDE > workstation from a CDROM without touchy a hair on the chinny-chin-chin > of your precious hard drive. It's an actual useful distro on a CDROM. > You can burn your own additional CDROM or use a floppy with it for > persistant data. > > www.knoppix.org > > It's a NICE portable toolset. Much lighter than a laptop. It sits in my > briefcase, taking up no room, but adding a sense of studly empowerment, > on those days when toting a full-function laptop seems unreasonable. > > This guy (Klaus Knopper ) is really talented (or maybe just insanely > dedicated, or both). It's a wonder why this hasn't been done before, > but there were a lot of fiddly technical hurdles. A lot. He deserves > accolades. > > Eirikur > From gtn at rbii.com Fri Apr 4 10:42:02 2003 From: gtn at rbii.com (Gavin Thomas Nicol) Date: Fri Apr 4 08:36:09 2003 Subject: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200304041042.02636.gtn@rbii.com> On Friday 04 April 2003 01:50 am, Steve Dossick wrote: > The future's already here, it's just too expensive right now ;) Right, and speaking to Jim's point, that's not just $$$ but also time. I might just well pay $500-$600 for a box with the PVR/Firewall/Access Point/File Server functionality if it "just worked". Good luck on the business! From jbone at deepfile.com Fri Apr 4 10:52:09 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Fri Apr 4 08:52:20 2003 Subject: Your Federal Government In Action was Fwd: Judge bans a book Message-ID: Free speech... as long as it doesn't interfere w/ tax collection. jb Begin forwarded message: > From: Jeff Daiell > Date: Fri Apr 4, 2003 09:14:17 US/Central > To: LPTnew , HCLPgroup > Cc: Debbie Russell , Marie Angell HCLP > , Elizabeth McLane , Christopher > Daiell , Colleen Rachel Daiell > , Kelly Daiell > Subject: Judge bans a book > Reply-To: lptexas@lptexas.org > > >> >> Sunday, March 30, 2003 >> Copyright ? Las Vegas Review-Journal >> >> COLUMN: Vin Suprynowicz >> The judge banned a book he never read >> >> Tax author, radio host and IRS gadfly Irwin Schiff >> argues his reading >> of statutes and Supreme Court decisions such as >> Brushaber v. Union >> Pacific R.R. Co. (240 US 1, 1916) have convinced him >> that paying income >> taxes on domestic wages is voluntary for most >> Americans. >> >> Why? Because if such a tax were made mandatory it >> would be an >> unconstitutional direct tax as currently enforced, >> under Article I of >> the Constitution, Sections 2 and 9, which still >> stipulate that direct >> taxes must be apportioned among the states by >> population. (Those >> sections were unaffected by the 16th Amendment, as >> the high court found >> in the aforementioned Brushaber case, as well as in >> Stanton v. Baltic >> Mining, [1916], and Cook v. Tait, 265 U.S. 47 >> [1924].) >> >> Whether you agree with him or not, in a free country >> like ours, surely >> Schiff is free to shout what he believes from the >> rooftops ... right? >> >> Apparently not. >> >> In federal court in Las Vegas on March 19, U.S. >> District Senior Judge >> Lloyd George ordered Schiff to stop giving lectures, >> and to stop >> selling his latest book: "The Federal Mafia: How the >> Government >> Illegally Imposes and Unlawfully Collects Income >> Taxes." >> >> "If they can ban me from speaking ... what good is >> freedom of speech?" >> Schiff asks. "I've never feared criminal >> prosecution, because I'd get >> to cross-examine their claims while they were under >> oath. It never >> dawned on me that they could ever ban a book ... >> especially when they >> can't present, subject to cross-examination, what in >> my book is wrong." >> >> Department of Justice trial attorney Evan Davis told >> the court Schiff >> has been "running one of the largest tax scams in >> U.S. history," >> encouraging people to file tax returns on which they >> assert they have >> no income subject to the tax. Davis asserted this >> "is designed to clog >> the federal court system and inundate the Internal >> Revenue Service." >> >> "Lloyd George banned a book he never read," Schiff >> argues. "The >> government was claiming this stuff I say is >> frivolous, that `He tells >> people to break the law.' The judge asked `What book >> does that?' They >> said, 'The Federal Mafia.' He said he'd like to see >> the book. On the >> counsel table I had all the books I sell, plus five >> huge volumes of the >> regulations that execute the Internal Revenue Code, >> so I gave him the >> book, which to my knowledge is the first time he >> ever saw the book. >> >> "There's a recess, he goes into chambers, he comes >> back within 10 >> minutes and basically bans the book. All he did was >> take the >> government's representations at face value. ... How >> can they ban a book >> without allowing me to cross-examine anyone? Here we >> are bringing >> democracy to Iraq and we can ban a book right here >> at home?" >> >> Judge George did not return phone messages last >> week, asking whether in >> fact he had read "The Federal Mafia" before he >> banned it. But local >> attorney Richard Salas, who represented Schiff >> employee and >> co-defendant Larry Cohen in the March 19 appearance >> (Mr. Cohen has >> since dismissed his attorney, apparently preferring >> to represent >> himself) agrees: "They seem to proceed from the >> notion that everyone >> knows what Schiff says is outrageous, so it must be >> false." >> >> Schiff attorney Noel Spaid of San Diego also agrees: >> "He didn't know >> the book at all, and I consider the injunction to be >> in violation of >> the First Amendment. ... It's vague and ambiguous; >> it doesn't specify >> what can and can't be done; it enjoins him from >> making statements >> 'against Internal Revenue law.' What does that mean? >> Search warrants >> have been quashed for vagueness that were more >> specific than that. ... >> We're going to argue that it's overly broad. >> >> "This judge summarily decided Irwin's positions are >> frivolous; he made >> no in-depth study or analysis; he offered no sound, >> reasoned decision >> as to why Irwin's positions are wrong or frivolous." >> >> "This is the first time I know of in the history of >> this country that a >> book has been banned where I'm not telling how to >> build a bomb; it's >> not pornographic." Schiff says. >> >> "A restraining order is an extraordinary measure; >> it's designed for >> cases where someone is in imminent danger. It's not >> as though I'm >> brewing up explosives. The government said I cost >> them $54 million >> dollars over the past three years. So what was I >> going to cost them >> over the next three weeks? What was the big rush? >> Isn't the First >> Amendment more important? >> >> "The United States government was established to >> protect rights," >> Schiff insists, "not to raise revenue. But now the >> courts see their >> first duty being to protect the raising of revenue. >> ... The government >> wants to ban me not because what I say is frivolous >> but because it's >> correct; anyone can verify it." >> >> Federal statutes allow criminal prosecution of >> anyone who advises >> others to break the law, Schiff contends. "But they >> haven't filed any >> criminal charges. Why not? Because then we'd be in >> criminal court, >> where I'd get to cross-examine them under oath. ..." >> >> Salas agrees. >> >> "When you look at it, it's really a lot easier for >> the government to do >> it this way" -- through a civil action claiming >> damages in the form of >> lost tax revenues from those who have read Schiff's >> book -- Salas says. >> If the government chose the criminal route, "You can >> either prosecute >> someone for failing to file -- but they can't do >> that because the zero >> return is a return -- or you can charge fraudulent >> deductions. But then >> Mr. Schiff could get the forum he wants, he could >> probably win >> recognition as an expert witness, at which point he >> could take the >> stand to explain why he thinks people should be able >> to file a zero >> return." >> >> Next week: Banning a book because it challenges >> "what everyone knows." >> >> Vin Suprynowicz, assistant editorial page editor of >> the Review-Journal, >> is author of the books "Send in the Waco Killers" >> and "The Ballad of >> Carl Drega." >> > > > ===== > > "And Texas, long a province, be: a Nation once again!" > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more > http://tax.yahoo.com From jbone at deepfile.com Fri Apr 4 11:01:56 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Fri Apr 4 09:02:06 2003 Subject: Supreme Court Tries Sodomy Message-ID: <247A18B2-66BF-11D7-8802-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Read that subject line again! Oh, the images... sometimes I think headline writers are comic geniuses. ;-) http://slate.msn.com/id/2080746/ jb From ejw at cse.ucsc.edu Fri Apr 4 09:15:12 2003 From: ejw at cse.ucsc.edu (Jim Whitehead) Date: Fri Apr 4 09:19:00 2003 Subject: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > P.S. Kit coming out next week -- supply your own hard drive, have the > entertainment of installing our os+software onto it (totally web based) > > P.P.S. No, I'm not paying Jim to do marketing :) But I might give free > shipping to anyone who puts 'FoRK' in the comment field on our > order form :) :-) Of course, this device would also be really neat in a DAV-enabled version. DAV is also supported on Linux, Windows, and Apple. You could even sub-brand it as a Calendar-sharing device for Apple iCal users, or a blog hosting device for iBlog users... - Jim From sdossick at yahoo.com Fri Apr 4 09:22:36 2003 From: sdossick at yahoo.com (Steve Dossick) Date: Fri Apr 4 09:22:37 2003 Subject: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Uh oh. If Jim keeps this up, I'll have to endow the "Martian Technologies Chair in Computer Science" at UCSC, just to force him to put that on his CV :) -s > From: "Jim Whitehead" > Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 09:15:12 -0800 > To: "Steve Dossick" , > Subject: RE: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. > >> P.S. Kit coming out next week -- supply your own hard drive, have the >> entertainment of installing our os+software onto it (totally web based) >> >> P.P.S. No, I'm not paying Jim to do marketing :) But I might give free >> shipping to anyone who puts 'FoRK' in the comment field on our >> order form :) > > :-) Of course, this device would also be really neat in a DAV-enabled > version. DAV is also supported on Linux, Windows, and Apple. You could even > sub-brand it as a Calendar-sharing device for Apple iCal users, or a blog > hosting device for iBlog users... > > - Jim From elias at cse.ucsc.edu Fri Apr 4 09:33:21 2003 From: elias at cse.ucsc.edu (Elias Sinderson) Date: Fri Apr 4 09:33:22 2003 Subject: future memes References: Message-ID: <3E8DC1E1.7040004@cse.ucsc.edu> Steve Dossick wrote: >The future's already here, it's just too expensive right now > Interestingly, that paraphrases something I wrote a year or so ago: "The future is here, you just can't afford it." Which, in turn, is similar to another quote (which I don't remember exactly or, unfortunately, who said it): "The future is (already?) here, it's just not widely distributed." Richard Dawkins would be having a field day with this meme, which appears to be coming up with increasing frequency... Elias From bill at wstoddard.com Fri Apr 4 12:36:23 2003 From: bill at wstoddard.com (Bill Stoddard) Date: Fri Apr 4 09:36:30 2003 Subject: Supreme Court Tries Sodomy In-Reply-To: <247A18B2-66BF-11D7-8802-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> References: <247A18B2-66BF-11D7-8802-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Message-ID: <3E8DC297.2020300@wstoddard.com> Jeff Bone wrote: > > Read that subject line again! Thanks Jeff, I just lost my lunch... From joe at barrera.org Fri Apr 4 10:04:55 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Fri Apr 4 10:06:44 2003 Subject: Supreme Court Tries Sodomy In-Reply-To: <247A18B2-66BF-11D7-8802-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> References: <247A18B2-66BF-11D7-8802-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Message-ID: <3E8DC947.80004@barrera.org> Jeff Bone wrote: > > Read that subject line again! Oh, the images... sometimes I think > headline writers are comic geniuses. ;-) Some days it's a *very* thin line separating Slate from The Onion... - Joe From tomwhore at slack.net Fri Apr 4 13:25:21 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Fri Apr 4 10:25:27 2003 Subject: [ptp-general] More Wireless Internet Access Set for Lower Manhattan Parks (fwd) Message-ID: More Wireless Internet Access Set for Lower Manhattan Parks By EDWARD WYATT A downtown business improvement district is planning to establish free high-speed wireless Internet access in six parks and public spaces in Lower Manhattan next month, significantly expanding the availability downtown of wireless connections to the Internet. Officials of the Alliance for Downtown New York, the business improvement district that encompasses most of Manhattan south of City Hall, said yesterday that the organization will set up wireless access points, which are known as Wi-Fi connections or "hot spots," in City Hall Park, the South Street Seaport area and Bowling Green. In addition, the wireless access points will be available in Vietnam Veterans Plaza on Water Street north of Broad Street; in Liberty Plaza, at Broadway and Liberty Street; and in Rector Park in Battery Park City. In those areas, plus at least one more for which the service is still being negotiated, anyone with a properly equipped laptop computer or personal digital assistant can enjoy free, high-speed access to the Internet through a system paid for by the Alliance. The networks will be similar to a wireless network set up in Bryant Park in midtown Manhattan that has grown in popularity since it was introduced last year. Although access is also available in a few other parks in the city, like Tompkins Square and Madison Square, those services are made available by individuals who live or work nearby and might not be accessible in all areas of the parks. Last year, the Downtown Alliance set up an experimental wireless network at Bowling Green. Dormant since last fall, it will be reestablished on May 1, at the same time as the five other downtown networks. The network should allow anyone in Lower Manhattan to walk to a free, wireless Internet connection within five minutes, said Shirley Jaffe, a vice president for economic development at the Downtown Alliance. "At a time when there is a lot of doom and gloom over Lower Manhattan, this certainly demonstrates that downtown does have a future," Ms. Jaffe said. The system is being created for the alliance by Emenity, a for-profit company formerly known as Cloud Networks. The company is affiliated with NYC Wireless, a non-profit organization that encourages the establishment of wireless networks. Anthony Townsend, the chief operating office of Emenity and a co-founder of NYC Wireless, said that the Lower Manhattan project will be one of the largest free wireless networks in the country. The Downtown Alliance says its effort will establish the first wireless business district in the country, although the claim is difficult to verify. Wireless networking is often a communal activity, where individuals hang an antenna for their own system out a window, making Internet access available to anyone who wants it. NYC Wireless has mapped 141 such hot spots in the New York City area, where individuals or companies make their networks available for public use. Another nonprofit organization, the Public Internet Project, mapped more than 13,000 places in Manhattan alone where signals from home or office wireless networks can be detected and used by a computer user. Mr. Townsend said Long Beach, Calif., has established a wireless network in the area of its convention center, and he said organizations in a growing number of cities are expected to begin offering similar services beginning this spring. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/04/nyregion/04WIRE.html From jbone at deepfile.com Fri Apr 4 12:35:29 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Fri Apr 4 10:35:32 2003 Subject: Supreme Court Tries Sodomy In-Reply-To: <3E8DC297.2020300@wstoddard.com> Message-ID: <35AF499A-66CC-11D7-8802-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> On Friday, Apr 4, 2003, at 11:36 US/Central, Bill Stoddard wrote: > Jeff Bone wrote: >> Read that subject line again! > > Thanks Jeff, I just lost my lunch... I hope that was because you were laughing too hard to keep it down... ;-) jb From johnhall at isomedia.com Fri Apr 4 13:35:44 2003 From: johnhall at isomedia.com (johnhall) Date: Fri Apr 4 13:38:57 2003 Subject: [fork] Operation Iraqi Freedom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <005201c2faf2$26ac4950$0400a8c0@JMHALL> And the only way to stop the first is to do the second. Good for 'ShrubCo'. The cost of doing the morally right thing isn't zero. It is just, in this case, incredibly small compared to the benefits. The rate of return exceeds stopping Nazi Germany. [I said rate, not magnitude.] > From: fork-bounces@xent.com [mailto:fork-bounces@xent.com] On Behalf Of > Eugen Leitl > > On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Phil Harris wrote: > > > This may be old bits, but hey wtf. > > > > This is what Saddam is doing: > > > > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3284-614607,00.html > > This may be old bits, but hey wtf. > > This is what ShrubCo is doing: > > http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20Photos/Photos%20of%20Iraq%20war%20vict im > s.htm From johnhall at isomedia.com Fri Apr 4 13:35:44 2003 From: johnhall at isomedia.com (johnhall) Date: Fri Apr 4 13:39:18 2003 Subject: Music Message-ID: <004d01c2faf2$26476d00$0400a8c0@JMHALL> http://www.poofcat.com/iraq1.html http://my.homewithgod.com/mistyshaven/haveyouforgotten/ http://www.countrygoldusa.com/the_eagle.asp (lyics only) Warning: Offensive to pro-Saddam protestors and governments. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lair.xent.com/pipermail/fork/attachments/20030404/f2c6d56d/attachment.htm From rah at shipwright.com Fri Apr 4 17:09:08 2003 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Fri Apr 4 14:33:31 2003 Subject: Hanson: The Train Is Leaving the Station Message-ID: The National Review Online Victor Davis Hanson April 4, 2003 7 :15 a.m. The Train Is Leaving the Station Will our ?friends? jump on in time? Wars disrupt the political landscape for generations. Changes sweep nations when their youth die in a manner impossible during peace. An isolationist United States became a world power after the defeat of Japan and Germany, buoyed by the confidence of millions of returning victorious veterans. Even today the pathologies of American society cannot be understood apart from the defeat in Vietnam, as an entire generation still views the world through the warped lenses of the 1960s. In some sense, postmodern quirky France today is explicable by the humiliation of 1940 and its colonial defeats to follow. So, too, one of the most remarkable military campaigns in American military history will shake apart the world as few other events in the last 30 years. Depressed and discredited pundits now turn to dire predictions of years of turmoil in postbellum Iraq. A lunatic Syria promises a Lebanon to come. Meanwhile we are currently reassured that the Atlantic Alliance is unchanged. The Washington-New York corridor, in sober and judicious tones, has rightly emphasized to us all that we must work harder to renew our old ties ? echoed by their like counterparts in Europe. But it is eerie how the more the experts insist on all these probable scenarios, the more they seem terrified that things are not as they were. Something weird, something unprecedented, is unfolding, driven by American public opinion ? completely ignored in Europe ? and the nation?s collective anger that Americans are dying by showing restraint as they are slandered by our ?friends.? Despite the protestations of a return to normalcy, this present war will ever so slowly, yet markedly nonetheless, change America?s relationships in a way unseen in the last 30 years. With little help from Saudi Arabia or Turkey ? ?allies? and ?hosts? to our troops ? damned by many of our NATO allies, stymied in the U.N., turned on by Russia, opposed by Germany and France, the Coalition nevertheless is systematically liberating a country under the most impossible of conditions. This experience in turn will oddly ? if we avoid hubris and maintain our sanity ? liberate us as well. Far from making the United States hegemonic, the success in Iraq will have a sobering effect on Americans. Contrary to pundits the hard-fought Anglo-American victory will not make us into hegemonists, but simply less na?ve about tradition-bound relationships and the normal method of doing business. I would expect military spending to increase, even as reluctance grows to get involved with any of our traditional allies . Given billions of dollars in foreign aid, the past salvation of Europe from the Soviet juggernaut, and a half-century of protection under our nuclear shield, the old way was supposed to work something like the following. At worse France and Germany would quietly call Mr. Powell. They would explain their predicaments and then abstain at the U.N., ensuring passage of a second decree. The traditionally wise and savvy German diplomats ? conscious of everything from the Berlin Airlift to the American promise to pledge New York to preserve Bonn from a Soviet nuclear strike ? would cherish American goodwill toward the German people, grimace somewhat, and then say something like: ?We believe you are wrong; but we are not going to ruin a half-century of mutual amity over a two-bit fascist Iraq. So good luck, win, and let us pray that you, not we, are right ? for both our sakes.? A Turkish prime minister would learn from Tony Blair, and thus explain to his parliament the historic and critical relationship with the United States, while vigorously campaigning to win approval for our armored divisions to hit Iraq from the north to help shorten a controversial war. Mexico and Canada would complain privately, but express North American solidarity. In other words, sober and sane Western statesmen would swallow their pique at a powerful United States acting unilaterally, seek to provide it diplomatic cover, and quietly accept that a removal of a mass-murdering dictator was in all liberal states? interests. Instead, just the opposite happened, and so we must eventually react to this radical realignment that brought it about. We can start with those hosts of American military bases. Many Americans are now dead in part because a NATO ally Turkey not merely refused its support, but did so in such a long and drawn out fashion that it is impossible to believe that it was not preordained to hamper U.S. military operations. And, of course, Turkey?s last-minute refusals to allow transit of U.S. divisions did exactly that by delaying the critical rerouting of troops and supplies to the Gulf. I would expect that we all will smile, still extend some minor aid, but simmer on the inside and quietly and professionally take steps to ensure that we are never put in such a position again. We should, without fanfare, bow out of Turkish-EU discussions, and let Europe and Turkey on their own decide the wisdom of allowing an Islamic country into the ?liberal? European confederation. The EU can handle Cyprus. Who knows, maybe Brussels will be forced to reward Turkish recalcitrance toward America with renewed subsidies and membership ? and who cares? So in the eleventh hour of this war, the democratic government of Turkey must pass some decree, if only symbolic, that they value our friendship and wish us to win in Iraq. Ditto the erosion with the Saudi Arabian relationship even if, as I expect, we will soon hear from their sheiks with various proclamations of liberalization and greater freedom for their unfree. Bases that earn us enmity, cannot be adequately used when Americans die nearby, and are expensive political liabilities, are not military assets. And the paradox grows worse when bases exist through the pretexts that they in part help to protect the host country that does not wish to be protected. We should smile, profess goodwill ? and then withdraw all American troops from Saudi Arabia as soon as events settle down in Iraq, reassessing in a post-Cold War, post-9/11 world our entire relationship with that medieval country. After all, we buy oil from the worst of all dictatorships in Teheran and the people there like us better than do the Saudis precisely because we are not complicit in their government. The Saudis, of course, could still catch the train as it leaves the station, close the madrassas, and join the 21st century ? but it is their call, not ours. We are told that an Israeli-Palestinian solution will restore our good name in the Middle East. Maybe. But like the past spectacle of Palestinians cheering news of the 3,000 American dead, the recent West Bank volunteers who wish to go to Baghdad to blow up more Americans and protect another Arab fascist don?t play well in the United States ? and make us wonder what our hundreds of millions of dollars in aid for the Palestinian Authority are for. We must maintain cordial relations with Russia ? but Russia has never had an accounting with tens of thousands of Communist apparatchiks who here and there inhabit the present government. This was a country, after all, which to the silence of the Arab and European worlds killed thousands of Muslims in Chechnya, rooted for the mass murderer Milosevic, allowed weapons to be sold to Saddam Hussein that would be used to kill Americans, and thwarted all our efforts in the U.N. Surely it is time for sobriety and circumspection in everything we do with them. If we thought Turkey?s recent turnabout was depressing, imagine a South Korea when that crisis heats up, as thousands in Seoul take to the street to protest our presence as they are hours away from being annihilated by North Korean artillery. As soon as possible we should begin discussions about carefully drawing down troops and relocating them far to the south to compose a ?strategic reserve? as tens of thousands of wealthy brave South Korean teenagers assume their exclusive place on the front-line to protect their own motherland from Korean Stalinists. And if we cannot convince China that it is time to rein in Pyongyang?s nukes, then we should throw up our hands and let Tokyo, Seoul ? even Taiwan ? do what is necessary to provide for their own strategic deterrence. In the neighborhood of the battlefield, Iran is in a unique position. The illegitimate government will have to tell its own restless population why the liberation of Iraq next door is a bad thing. The unfortunate Iranians, scarred by a dirty war with Saddam Hussein, weary of mullocracy that they brought in themselves, will not be unhappy that the soldiers a decade ago who slaughtered them are losing, and the changes that are coming across the border are what they themselves want. Syria, the embryo of most terrorist groups and the occupier of Lebanon, still issues empty threats. For all the scary rhetoric and promises of worldwide jihad, an impotent Syria must be terrified of the consequences should it send direct aid to Saddam Hussein. It is a historical rarity that 300,000 United States troops are at last fighting an Arab dictator with 70 percent of the American people?s support ? and losing far fewer dead than those slaughtered in one day in their sleep in a barracks in Lebanon. And then there is the madness of Europe. It is time to speak far more softly and carry a far larger stick. France may be right that we all have really come to the end of history ? and so we should give them an opportunity to prove it, to match deed with word by being delighted as we withdraw troops from Germany. Germany may or may not be embracing the frightening old nationalist rhetoric ? but again that will be France?s problem, not ours. Let us hope that the more sober in Germany can still grasp at what Mr. Schroeder has nearly thrown away, and see that few superpowers have given it so much and asked for so little in return ? and genuinely wish it to do well. But again it is their call, not ours. We do not have to withdraw from a dead NATO, but we should simply grin and spend as much on it as Europe does ? and so let it die on the vine. How could we be allies with such countries as France and Germany when sizable minorities there want a fascistic Saddam Hussein to defeat us? There is not much need to speak of the governments of Canada and Mexico. More liberal trade agreements and concessions with Mr. Chretien are about as dead as open borders are with Mr. Fox. It is the singular achievement of the present Canadian government to turn a country ? whose armed forces once stormed an entire beach at Normandy and fielded one of the most heroic armies in wars for freedom ? into a bastion of anti-Americanism without a military. Both countries are de facto socialist states, and the Anglo-French pique we see in Europe is right across our northern borders in miniature. Anyone who looked at the papers in Mexico City could rightly assume our neighbors? elite preferred an Iraqi victory. And so where does all that leave us? Unlike the conventional rhetoric of pessimists (e.g., ?the world hates us?), we may well be in a stronger position than ever before. Russian arms, German bunkers, and French contracts will become known in Iraq and will be weighed against America?s use of overwhelming force for a moral cause in a legal and human fashion against a barbaric regime. The Middle Eastern claim that we won?t or can?t fight on the ground is a myth. And America, not the Orwellian Arab Street, is the catalyst for democratic reform. Looming on the horizon are Iraqi archives, the evidence of weapons of mass destruction, and a happy liberated populace that Europe would have otherwise left well enough alone to profit from its overseers. The United Nations has lost its soft spot in the hearts of Americans, and is more likely to appease dictators than aid consensual governments. The general-secretary should be scrambling madly before the armistice to win our good graces ? never has American support for the U.N. been lower, even as a U.N. resolution has never been better enforced at almost no cost to its general membership. The debate has now spun out of control and questions not merely our own membership but also the very propriety of the residence of the General Assembly headquarters in New York. And as for Britain, Australia, Spain, Denmark, Italy, and a host of Eastern European countries who are rolling down the tracks with us, waving to the exasperating at the station, we have to show them as much appreciation for their stalwart courage as we do abject disdain for the duplicity of their peers behind. The world is upside down and we should expect some strange scenes of scrambling in the weeks ahead as side-glancing diplomats and nail-biting envoys flock to meet Mr. Powell in Washington, who ? far from fearing those recent idiotic calls for his resignation ? will in fact emerge as one of the most effective and powerful secretaries in recent history. Such are the ironies of war. It will all be an interesting show. ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From johnhall at isomedia.com Fri Apr 4 15:02:34 2003 From: johnhall at isomedia.com (johnhall) Date: Fri Apr 4 15:02:38 2003 Subject: "Pro-Peace" unless those dying are ... Message-ID: <000001c2fafe$48612b40$0400a8c0@JMHALL> Israeli civilians. http://brain-terminal.com/video/peace-love/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lair.xent.com/pipermail/fork/attachments/20030404/005b3050/attachment.htm From bill at whump.com Fri Apr 4 15:59:29 2003 From: bill at whump.com (Bill Humphries) Date: Fri Apr 4 15:58:31 2003 Subject: future memes In-Reply-To: <3E8DC1E1.7040004@cse.ucsc.edu> Message-ID: <78E67008-66F9-11D7-838C-003065F62CD6@whump.com> On Friday, April 4, 2003, at 09:33 AM, Elias Sinderson wrote: > Which, in turn, is similar to another quote (which I don't remember > exactly or, unfortunately, who said it): > > "The future is (already?) here, it's just not widely distributed." Google says it's Tim O'Reilly quoting Bill Gibson. http://www.google.com/ search?q=The+future+is+(already?)+here,+it's+just+not+widely+distributed .&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 -- whump From gbolcer at endeavors.com Fri Apr 4 17:16:33 2003 From: gbolcer at endeavors.com (Gregory Alan Bolcer) Date: Fri Apr 4 17:18:45 2003 Subject: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. References: Message-ID: <3E8E2E71.1090505@endeavors.com> I tried to order my with a shiny purple plastic case and RAID0 using dual 1GB IBM Microdrives. What gives? Your e-commerce site didn't give me those options. Greg Steve Dossick wrote: >>From: Gavin Thomas Nicol >> >>How's business for these things? Seems like there is a clearly emerging market >>for such devices in the home. The ideal would be to have one box be the >>PVR/File Server/Firewall/Access Point for the home... kind of what I'm >>planning to build in my spare (hah!) time. > > > Business is pretty good. There's lots of amazing things you could do with a > cheap wireless networked cpu in your house (with some decent local > storage)...all the way from home automation to personalized browsing > (automated culling of RSS feeds into a personalized electronic newspaper), > media handling (PVR stuff, audio stuff, digital picture stuff) etc etc. > > The real key is to keep it simple enough that someone like my father can use > it right out of the box. It also needs to stay cheap enough that folks will > buy it without thinking too hard about it. > > The future's already here, it's just too expensive right now ;) > > -s > > -- Gregory Alan Bolcer, CTO | work: +1.949.833.2800 gbolcer at endeavors.com | http://endeavors.com Endeavors Technology, Inc.| cell: +1.714.928.5476 From sdossick at yahoo.com Fri Apr 4 17:21:07 2003 From: sdossick at yahoo.com (Steve Dossick) Date: Fri Apr 4 17:21:07 2003 Subject: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. In-Reply-To: <3E8E2E71.1090505@endeavors.com> Message-ID: Well, if you'll front the $20-$30k for a custom, injection-molded plastic case with rf shielding, I'll see what I can do. ;) -s > From: Gregory Alan Bolcer > Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 17:16:33 -0800 > To: fork@xent.com > Subject: Re: [NYTimes] Live from Mars, it's a wireless box. > > I tried to order my with a shiny > purple plastic case and RAID0 using > dual 1GB IBM Microdrives. > > What gives? Your e-commerce site didn't > give me those options. > > Greg > > Steve Dossick wrote: >>> From: Gavin Thomas Nicol >>> >>> How's business for these things? Seems like there is a clearly emerging >>> market >>> for such devices in the home. The ideal would be to have one box be the >>> PVR/File Server/Firewall/Access Point for the home... kind of what I'm >>> planning to build in my spare (hah!) time. >> >> >> Business is pretty good. There's lots of amazing things you could do with a >> cheap wireless networked cpu in your house (with some decent local >> storage)...all the way from home automation to personalized browsing >> (automated culling of RSS feeds into a personalized electronic newspaper), >> media handling (PVR stuff, audio stuff, digital picture stuff) etc etc. >> >> The real key is to keep it simple enough that someone like my father can use >> it right out of the box. It also needs to stay cheap enough that folks will >> buy it without thinking too hard about it. >> >> The future's already here, it's just too expensive right now ;) >> >> -s >> >> > > > -- > Gregory Alan Bolcer, CTO | work: +1.949.833.2800 > gbolcer at endeavors.com | http://endeavors.com > Endeavors Technology, Inc.| cell: +1.714.928.5476 > > > > > > > > From johnhall at isomedia.com Fri Apr 4 20:21:11 2003 From: johnhall at isomedia.com (johnhall) Date: Fri Apr 4 20:28:33 2003 Subject: To people who think *I'm* bad ... Message-ID: <000d01c2fb2a$ca2e37e0$0400a8c0@JMHALL> Actually, interesting talk about "4 different tribes" of Americans. You might want to check out the book Albion's Seed: Four British Folkways in America ==================================================================== >From "Julie C" If you look at the political philosophy of American Presidents in light of the four American tribes---the Hamiltonians, Wilsonians, Jeffersonians, and Jacksonians---a casual scrutiny will reveal that the United States has *never* lost a war, nor failed to address either a major honor violation or threat against us while under the leadership of either a Hamiltonian or Jacksonian President. Committing a gross honor violation against us early in the term of a clearly Jacksonian President is not the brightest move another tribe has ever made. And now we have Syria volunteering for a game of Cowboys and Arabs. I have to mention here that as an American born and bred in one of the most heavily Jacksonian areas of the country, that I really appreciate that generosity on the part of the Syrians. Of course, as a Jacksonian *female*, my opinions on war are generally less aggressive than those of the average Jacksonian male---so realize in my words that follow that I'm probably understating the case with a bit of that traditional feminine delicacy. You see, Jacksonians are very, very *good* at War to the Knife. Our only real problem with war is our rather unfortunate tendency to run out of peoples willing to volunteer to come out and play. So, from a strictly sporting standpoint, I have to appreciate the Syrians. In a world where we Jacksonians were completely unfettered by other tribes, it would have been enough that the Syrians are members of the *same* tribe that attacked us in a very dishonorable way and cost the lives of thousands of our civilians (for the sake of a good fight, we're willing to count Hamiltonian, Jeffersonian, and Wilsonian civilians as "ours"). Regrettably, in the world as it is, the Wilsonians, Hamiltonians, and Jeffersonians are all too aware of the havoc unrestrained Jacksonians can and will wreak in response to gross honor violations, and have put a few "rules of the game" in place. Kind of like a handicap in golf, it tends to make the game more sporting. One of the "rules of the game" imposed upon us by our kindred tribes, before they'll unleash us on an offending tribe, is that the game has to generally follow "national" boundaries regardless of members of other nations' kinship with the offending tribe. Before we can get let loose to take them, offending tribe members in adjoining nation states have to volunteer. Sadly, they rarely do. Frequently, we're left staring wistfully over some border at SOB's who are kith and kin of the tribe that riled us up---SOB's who carefully avoid giving us the necessary public excuse to cross that line and play some more. It's times like these that a good Jacksonian can really *appreciate* obliging folks like the Syrians. What? You guys are actually volunteering to play? You think our "war protesters" are *us*? Bwahahahahaha. About those "war protesters"--lemme clue you guys in: the Hamiltonians generally are willing to point out honor violations and turn us loose to advance their business interests; the Wilsonians will sometimes send us out on a *very* short leash to "make the world a better place"; but usually, the Wilsonians and Jeffersonians, out of long experience living with us (they are sibling tribes, after all), have developed a genuine horror of what we can, will, and *do* do when someone *seriously* violates our honor code and there's no Wilsonian, Jeffersonian, or Hamiltonian in the Oval Office holding our leash. We have "war protesters" because behind the engaging facade of Wilsonian and Jeffersonian ditziness is that deeply ingrained tribal horror at what seriously pissed Jacksonians do to the offending tribe. They know they've never seen us this pissed in their lives and they're genuinely frightened and sick to their stomachs, in advance, contemplating the possibility that if we aren't restrained somehow, there just might not be enough Arabs left at the end of the game to form a soccer team. And our sibling tribes, when they gang up on us, generally do have *some* moderating influence on our behavior. We know we're far from perfect, even though we, as America's warrior tribe, do think we've got our heads screwed on straighter than our brothers and sisters. But the longstanding rule between us and our siblings regarding when they hold our leash, and when they let us go, is that we have to stop at the next national border *unless* the people across it step up and volunteer to play the game. So, hey! Syria! Thanks. Our guys'll be seeing you guys Real Soon Now. Julie * * * o/~ Oh the summertime is comin' and the trees are sweetly bloomin' and the wild mountain thyme blows around the purple heather.... o/~ From udhay at pobox.com Sat Apr 5 17:00:40 2003 From: udhay at pobox.com (Udhay Shankar N) Date: Sat Apr 5 03:38:06 2003 Subject: future memes In-Reply-To: <3E8DC1E1.7040004@cse.ucsc.edu> References: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20030405165954.03095630@frodo.hserus.net> At 09:33 AM 4/4/03 -0800, Elias Sinderson wrote: >Which, in turn, is similar to another quote (which I don't remember >exactly or, unfortunately, who said it): > >"The future is (already?) here, it's just not widely distributed." Originally attributed to William Gibson, but Bruce Sterling also used it in several forms. Udhay -- ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com)) From rah at shipwright.com Sat Apr 5 09:20:34 2003 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Sat Apr 5 06:25:23 2003 Subject: The Spanish Prisoner in Baghdad... Message-ID: Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the first Iraqi Spanish Prisoner/Nigerian 419 scam... Cheers, RAH Who expects to clog more than a few spam filters with this... :-). ------- --- begin forwarded text Status: RO To: muhammedmagai@breathe.com From: muhammedmagai@breathe.com Reply-To: muhammedmagai@breathe.com Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 11:29:32 GMT Subject: URGENT ASSISTANCE(FROM IRAQ) Dear Sir/Madam First let me use this medium to introduce myself , I am Mohammed MARGAI from KONO district north of Baghdad IRAQ from the family of late Alhaji Mustafa MARGAI A MEMBER OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS. MY late father Alhaji Mustafa MARGAI before his death he hold a very sensitive position in government in IRAQ ,My father has a bullet shot by the the American soldiers on his way to KUWAIT THE NEGHBOURING COUNTRY OF IRAQ,He was later conveyed to a government hospital in KUWAIT for a medical treatmet wherein he later died, in the hospital bed my father reveal and confide in me about one metallic box ( consignment)deposit that he made with a trust and finance house in Europe . containing ($30,000,000.00) THIRTY MILLION UNITED STATES DOLLARS. Nobody in the trust and finance house knows the real content of the metal box because my father wisely declared them as art work and family treasures from the national museum of monument. since the death of my father the rebel has held us hostage until yesterday, I am presently in the refugee camp now seeking for your help and assistance for you to come to my aid I proposed that you stand as my proxy person that is my late fathers foreign partner, so as to get the metal box out of the trust and finance house, transfer it to your country where we can make use of it in a lucrative business investment in your country. This transaction is now only known by you, myself and my old sick mother whom is now in with me in the camp waiting for the time I get this fund out of the trust house, the secrecy and confidentiality should be maintained for the successful transfer of this fund. I will be handing over to you the original certificate of deposit which the finance house gave to my father, these fund was deposited with a secrete code that means it will be more easy for you to retrieve the fund and I withhold the secrete code for security reasons as you show interest the secrete code and the certificates of deposit will be given to you after solid arrangement with both of us then you can now proceed to the finance house in Europe to retrieve the consignment for investment in your country. Please reply to this address:hhassanbsc@caramail.com please send me your private telephone and fax number for more confidential discussions. Best Regards Muhammed Magai --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From baisley at alumni.rice.edu Sat Apr 5 15:34:08 2003 From: baisley at alumni.rice.edu (Wayne Baisley) Date: Sat Apr 5 13:29:38 2003 Subject: The Spanish Prisoner in Baghdad... References: Message-ID: <3E8F4BD0.6020604@alumni.rice.edu> R. A. Hettinga wrote: > Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the first Iraqi Spanish Prisoner/Nigerian 419 scam... Here's one from near the top. But this is a pathetic amount of money for the family of Tariq, and they don't even promise the usual 20% ... Oddly, it seems to have originated from Dundalk, Ireland. The 874 dialing code seems to be Inmarsat's for the West Atlantic Ocean. The Al-Bawaba gimmick was a nice touch, though. Message-Id: <200304051216.h35CGlb22715@www.albawaba.com> From: "ahmed aziz" Reply-To: "ahmed aziz" To: ahmedaziz@phantomemail.com Subject: FROM AHMED Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 12:08:20 +0000 X-Mailer: Webmail Client @ albawaba.com X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: [159.134.67.127] X-UIDL: [L>!!pG0!!dD2!!Y2K!! FROM: MR AHMED TARIQ AZIZ IN THE CITY OF BAGHDAD ( IRAQ.) TEL NO:YOUR INT COUNTRY CODE+874762692483 FAX NO:YOUR INT COUNTRY CODE+874762692485 EMAIL(ahmedaziz@phantomemail.com). Dear Sir/Madam SON OF TAFIZ AZIZ OF IRAQ SEEKING YOUR IMMEDIATE ASSISTANCE. Please allow me a kind space in your mind as a stage has reached when I have to Seek for your immediate assistance. This is necessitated by my urgent need to reach a dependable and trust Wordy foreign partner. This request may seem strange and unsolicited but I Will crave your indulgence and pray that you view it Seriously. My name is MR AHMED TARIQ-AZIZ the Son of the Deputy Prime Minister of IRAQ Presently under WAR My Mother is from NAJAF. Due to the State of unrest we are facing, the Government of theUunited State of America has promise to freeze all the account of top military officers Banked in Europe and other western world. As such I am seeking your consent as the first son of my father and with instruction from him MAJOR GENERAL TARIQ AZIZ (THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER OF IRAQ) to contact you to assist in standing as the beneficiary of his fund presently in a security company here in BAGHDAD (IRAQ) valued at USD20.5M (TWENTY MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND UNITED STATE DOLLAS ONLY) Which he has planed to move to another account which you are going to provide because the fund has already been withdrawn and kept in a security company in my country but with the present situation it is not save for us to keep such amount of money in a company here especially now that the War is moving very close to BAGHDAD. As such the security company is ready to move this fund out from BAGHDAD (IRAQ) to any of their affiliated company in Europe in your name where you can now make claim of this fund. In view of this, we need a reliable and trustworthy foreign partner who can assist us to move this money out of my country as the beneficiary. WE have sufficient ''CONTACTS'' here to move the fund under Diplomatic Cover to a security company in Europe in your name. This is to ensure that the Diplomatic Baggage is marked ''CONFIDENTIAL'' and it will not pass through normal custom/airport screening and clearance. This transaction will be properly handled with Modesty and honesty to a huge success within One week. The said money is for my dad and requires total confidentiality. We would please need you to stand on our behalf as the beneficiary of this fund in Europe. This is because my father is under restricted movement and watch and hence we want to be very careful in other not to lose this Fund, which he has worked so hard for. Thus, if you are Willing to assist us move this fund out of Iraq, you can contact me through my email Address Or My Tel Number above which is a Sat Phone, this is due to the fact that all our telecom lines have been bugged in Iraq, which makes it unsafe for communication in and out of the country. To enable us discuss the modalities and what will be your share (percentage) for assisting us it is important you mail me via my mail address or call me on my phone number above. Please note that there are no RISKS involved in this Deal as every ones Security is guaranteed as far as we follow the required guidelines. I will hence furnish you with further details of this Deal as soon as I am assured of your sincere interest to assist us. I must use this opportunity and medium to implore you to exercise the Utmost indulgence to keep this matter extraordinarily confidential, whatever your decision is please do mail me, while I await your prompt response. Thank you Best Regards MR AHMED AZIZ (ahmedaziz@phantomemail.com)OR(ahmedaziz@albawaba.com). N\B. When you are calling my line, you dial your country Intl. access Code, then you dial directly, do not include my country code. Just dial your country Intl. access code + 874762692483 and my fax Number is your country Intl. Access code + 874762692485 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This E-mail was sent through Albawaba E-mail. Get your own at mail.albawaba.com From khare at alumni.caltech.edu Sat Apr 5 17:24:06 2003 From: khare at alumni.caltech.edu (khare@alumni.caltech.edu) Date: Sat Apr 5 14:30:00 2003 Subject: NYTimes.com Article: Akamai Cancels a Contract for Arabic Network's Site Message-ID: <20030405222406.81E9D35040@web38t.prvt.nytimes.com> This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by khare@alumni.caltech.edu. Points to the Times for remembering the connection to Lewin, but they don't note explicitly that he was Jewish and in the Israeli armed forces. None of which requires a particularly exotic conspiracy theory to explain. Internet infrastructure is private, from Google to Akamai to Worldcom, so whatever you think of this decision, the beauty is that there are other providers in a decentralized system. Rohit khare@alumni.caltech.edu Akamai Cancels a Contract for Arabic Network's Site April 4, 2003 By WARREN ST. JOHN In a move sure to complicate the efforts of Al Jazeera, the Arabic news network, to get its English-language Web site running, Akamai Technologies abruptly canceled a contract on Wednesday to provide Web services for the site. Employees at Al Jazeera headquarters in Doha, Qatar, said they were frustrated by the decision, though not entirely surprised. "It has nothing to do with technical issues," said Joanne Tucker, the managing editor of the English-language site. "It's nonstop political pressure on these companies not to deal with us." Akamai, based in Cambridge, Mass., would not comment on the reason for the cancellation. But Jeff Young, a company spokesman, issued a statement confirming that Akamai would no longer do business with Al Jazeera. "Akamai worked briefly this week with Al Jazeera to understand the issues they are having distributing their Web sites," he said. "We ultimately decided not to continue a customer relationship with Al Jazeera, and we are not going to be providing them our services." The English version of Al Jazeera's Web site was shut by hackers roughly 12 hours after it went online on March 25. For a time, Web users trying to gain access were directed to a Web page bearing an American flag. Akamai, whose clients include MSNBC and CNN, maintains a broad network of servers that provide protection from hacking attempts. It was for that reason, Ms. Tucker said, that Al Jazeera hired the company. "Basically this was our answer to the hacking that has been nonstop and pretty aggressive," she said. "We had a done-and-dusted deal on March 28. Then yesterday, we get a letter from them terminating the contract." Akamai's decision is one in a series of headaches for Al Jazeera since the start of the war. Defense Department officials criticized the network for showing images of dead and captured American soldiers. After that episode, the network's American financial correspondents were banned from the floor of the New York Stock Exchange and the Nasdaq. On Wednesday, Iraqi officials expelled one Jazeera correspondent from Baghdad and barred another from reporting there. American officials have also accused the network of unduly emphasizing civilian casualties in Iraq. Al Jazeera contends that much of the traffic that shut down its site was from Web users simply curious about its coverage. The search engine Lycos reported yesterday that "Al Jazeera" was its most-searched-for term last week. Ms. Tucker said that Al Jazeera hoped to have its English site up within 24 hours, but that without Akamai's many servers, the site would be more vulnerable to hacking attempts. The site went live just after 7 p.m. last night. "It doesn't derail us," she said. "We can withstand the hacking up to a point, but if they focus it all on one server it would put a lot of pressure on that server. "We hope that won't be the case," she added. "We're working on it all the time." Ms. Tucker called the hacking attempts "pathetic." "It's a narrow, pro-censorship attempt to silence a news site," she said. This is not the first time that Akamai has had to deal first-hand with tensions between the Arab world and the United States. The company's co-founder and chief technology officer, Daniel Lewin, 31, was on American Airlines Flight 11 on Sept. 11, 2001, when the plane crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/04/technology/04WEB.html?ex=1050581446&ei=1&en=b88bab155a37405a HOW TO ADVERTISE --------------------------------- For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company From joe at barrera.org Sat Apr 5 17:28:32 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Sat Apr 5 17:30:29 2003 Subject: The Puente Hills Blind Thrust System Message-ID: <3E8F82C0.8020307@barrera.org> If that isn't a killer name for a band, I don't know what is. - Joe -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Newly Discovered Fault Under L.A. Date: 5 Apr 2003 23:26:00 -0000 From: brian-slashdotnews@hyperreal.org To: slashdotnews@hyperreal.org Link: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/04/05/1950246 Posted by: michael, on 2003-04-05 22:08:40 Topic: science, 95 comments from the here-i-sit-on-the-head-of-mount-tam dept. [1]Randolpho writes "Whether you like the city or not, you can't say Los Angeles doesn't have a fault. It does, and it's one of earth-shattering proportions. [2]Geologists have confirmed that LA was built right over a faultline, which they're calling the Puente Hills Blind Thrust System; it runs from northern Orange County through Los Angeles on up to Beverly Hills, and has a habbit of ripping earthquakes as large as 7.5 on the Richter Scale every 10 thousand years or so. And the last one was about 8 thousand years ago." References 1. mailto:randolphothegreat@yahoo.com 2. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/04/0403_030403_earthquake.html -- "I don't like Mondays. This livens up the day." From rah at shipwright.com Sun Apr 6 05:15:06 2003 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Sun Apr 6 00:15:44 2003 Subject: How Books Have Shaped U.S. Policy Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text Status: RO Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 03:31:01 -0400 To: "Philodox Clips" From: "R. A. Hettinga" Subject: How Books Have Shaped U.S. Policy Reply-To: "Philodox Clips" Sender: The New York Times April 5, 2003 How Books Have Shaped U.S. Policy By MICHIKO KAKUTANI President Bush has never been known as a bookworm. An instinctive politician who goes with his gut, he has usually left the heavy reading in the family to his wife, Laura, a former librarian. He is "often uncurious and as a result ill informed," his former speechwriter, David Frum, wrote in a memoir this year, adding that "conspicuous intelligence seemed actively unwelcome in the Bush White House." It is curious then that books by historians, philosophers and policy analysts have played a significant role in shaping and promulgating the administration's thinking about foreign policy, America's place in the world and the war against Iraq. Michael Harrington's book "The Other America" is widely credited with helping catalyze the Kennedy-Johnson war on poverty in the 1960's and the creation of Great Society programs. George Gilder's book "Wealth and Poverty" was publicly endorsed by President Ronald Reagan, who embraced its message of tax cuts. George H. W. Bush's comparison of Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait to Hitler's annexation of the Sudetenland was informed by his reading of Martin Gilbert's book "The Second World War." And Robert D. Kaplan's book "Balkan Ghosts," which emphasized the ancient hatreds of the region, is said to have contributed to the initial reservations of President Bill Clinton about becoming more boldly involved there. In this White House, no single book is pivotal, but an array of writings ? many by neoconservative authors closely affiliated with administration officials or their intellectual mentors ? have provided a fertile philosophical matrix for policy decisions as various as the doctrine of pre-emption and civilian oversight of military affairs. Indeed Mr. Bush, whose father was accused of lacking the "vision thing," presides over an administration that is driven in high degree by big and often abstract theories: theories that promote a "moral" (some might say moralistic) approach to foreign policy; an unembarrassed embrace of power; a detestation of relativistic thinking; and an often Manichaean view of the world that, like the president's language, manages to be darkly Hobbesian and willfully optimistic at the same time. It is less a matter of outside scholars and experts preaching to members of the administration than an incestuous world of policy making, policy analysis and historical commentary in which like-minded colleagues and friends trade ideas, egg one another on and sometimes provide spin on one another's behalf. In the last few years a growing number of theorists have published books to promote their ideas. Most of them have a distinctively instructive or prescriptive tone: this is what is wrong (with America, with the military, with the world); this is what needs to be done to fix it. Last summer President Bush ? whose favorite book had been Marquis James's 1929 biography of Sam Houston, who evolved from being the man the Cherokees called Big Drunk to the father of Texas ? made it known that he was reading "Supreme Command" by Eliot A. Cohen, a member of the Defense Policy Board (along with its former chairman, Richard N. Perle) and a professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies (where Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz was once dean). The book was widely circulated at the Defense and State Departments and came emblazoned with a blurb from the editor of The Weekly Standard, William Kristol, saying it was the single volume he most wished Mr. Bush to read. On March 21, as the war was beginning, Mr. Kristol said at the American Enterprise Institute that Mr. Bush "seems to understand, better than many presidents, I would say, the lesson of our friend Eliot Cohen's book of about a year ago, `Supreme Command,' that political strategy should drive military strategy." The ubiquitous Mr. Kristol is also the author, along with Lawrence F. Kaplan, of a new book called "The War Over Iraq: Saddam's Tyranny and America's Mission," which applauds the administration's determination to "liberate" Iraq and tries to place the president's "robust approach to the international scene" in the tradition of Ronald Reagan and Harry S. Truman. As for the Cohen book, its central thesis, in Clemenceau's famous words, is that "war is too important to be left to the generals." It exhorts civilian leaders to query, prod and give orders to their subordinates ? an interesting thesis given the allegations in the military that Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld ignored the advice of senior officers and initially committed insufficient troops to Iraq. "Supreme Command" charges that the president's father abdicated responsibility in favor of the military in the first Persian Gulf war, ending it too early and allowing Saddam Hussein to stay in power. In interviews Mr. Cohen has chided the American military, saying he is wary when it na?vely dabbles in geopolitics. One example he has cited concerns the military's worry that the Arab street might erupt in protest if the United States ousted President Hussein. And he has praised Mr. Rumsfeld for exercising the sort of civilian control over the Pentagon that he admires. "The point is that Rumsfeld is really ? is on top," Mr. Cohen told Brit Hume of Fox News last year. "He's asking the tough, probing questions. Churchill once said, it's always right to probe, and I think that's the right motto for a civilian leader." Two of Mr. Rumsfeld's favorite books are reportedly William Manchester's biography of Winston Churchill, "The Last Lion," and Roberta Wohlstetter's study of intelligence failure, "Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision." Several books and thinkers also appear to have helped form the thinking of Vice President Dick Cheney, whose position on Iraq became increasingly akin to that of neoconservatives like Mr. Kristol in the year after 9/11. Last fall he read "An Autumn of War" by Victor Davis Hanson, a classicist, military historian and National Review contributor, whom he later invited to dinner. In that volume Mr. Hanson wrote approvingly of the ancient Greek view of war as "terrible but innate to civilization ? and not always unjust or amoral if it is waged for good causes to destroy evil and save the innocent." He asserted that we were in an "outright bloody war against tyranny, intolerance and theocracy," and he called for going to war "hard, long, without guilt, apology or respite until our enemies are no more." Newsweek said that "Cheney told his aides that Hanson's book reflected his philosophy." Newsweek also reported that after 9/11 Mr. Cheney spent much of his time in an undisclosed location reading books about weapons of mass destruction and consulting with scholars about the Middle East. Among them was Bernard Lewis, the Princeton historian who wrote the best-selling "What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response" and was a participant in a pre-Sept. 11 study of ancient empires, sponsored by Mr. Rumsfeld's office, to understand how they maintained their dominance. Mr. Lewis reportedly told Mr. Cheney that the Arab world looked down on weakness and respected the exercise of force. After talks with him and other Middle East experts like the Johns Hopkins scholar Fouad Ajami, Time reported, Mr. Cheney "gradually abandoned his former skepticism about the potential for democracy in the Middle East," a development that became a tipping point in the tilt toward war. Early this year Mr. Lewis wrote an article for Newsweek International in which he made a case for American intervention in Iraq and argued that "worries about Iraqi civilians ? fighting in the streets, popular resistance" were overblown. Now Mr. Lewis has written an article for The Wall Street Journal Europe in which he argues that Iraqis may be reluctant to welcome American soldiers because antiwar protests reinforce their worry that "the United States may flinch from finishing the job." Mr. Hanson also predicted a quick war, three to four weeks, he told The Los Angeles Times, while Mr. Cohen told the House Armed Services Committee last October that establishing a moderate regime in Baghdad "would have beneficial consequences well beyond Iraq, including in our war against Islamic extremism." Many of the thinkers in the continuing dialogue among administration officials and the neoconservatives urging them toward war wear several hats. For instance, Robert Kagan is best known as the author of the hot new policy book "Of Paradise and Power," in which he writes that on "major strategic and international questions today, Americans are from Mars and Europeans are from Venus." Although the book has been hailed for its incisive and in some ways prescient analysis of trans-Atlantic differences, it can also be read as a defense of America's aggressive unilateralism. Mr. Kagan has played a prominent role, along with Mr. Kristol, at the Project for the New American Century, a group that calls for the United States to adopt a muscular military posture and "challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values." Among the people who signed the project's 1997 statement of principles were Mr. Cheney, Mr. Rumsfeld, Mr. Wolfowitz, I. Lewis Libby (Mr. Cheney's chief of staff) and Mr. Cohen. Also signing were Mr. Kagan's father, the Yale classics professor Donald Kagan (who provided an enthusiastic blurb for Mr. Hanson's book), and the theorist Francis Fukuyama, whose 1992 book, "The End of History and the Last Man," famously (and to some, absurdly) trumpeted the triumph of the West and the exhaustion of alternatives to liberal democracy. Supporters of the Project group like Mr. Fukuyama, Mr. Wolfowitz and William J. Bennett (former secretary of education) ? along with other neocons like Justice Clarence Thomas and Alan Keyes (the conservative presidential candidate) ? are followers of the late Leo Strauss, who was a political philosopher at the University of Chicago and a godfather of sorts to the neocon movement. "Straussians," the conservative author Dinesh D'Souza has written, like to use the philosophy of "natural right" ? which for the ancients was a basis for differentiating between right and wrong ? "to defend liberal democracy and moral values against their adversaries both foreign and indigenous." Many of Strauss's ideas were popularized by Allan Bloom, who was the author of the best seller "The Closing of the American Mind" and a mentor to both Mr. Fukuyama and Mr. Wolfowitz (who became the inspiration for a minor character in "Ravelstein," Saul Bellow's 2000 roman ? clef about Bloom). Both Strauss and Bloom reviled moral relativism, invoked the teaching of the classics and took an elitist view of education. As teachers in the Socratic tradition, they also ardently believed in mentors, a role that Mr. Kristol, an avowed Straussian, filled so energetically as Vice President Dan Quayle's chief of staff that he became known as "Dan Quayle's brain." In "Ravelstein," Mr. Bellow, described the Wolfowitz and Bloom characters talking about Desert Storm. "And it was essential to fit up-to-the-minute decisions in the gulf war ? made by obviously limited pols like Bush and Baker," he wrote, "into a true-as-possible picture of the forces at work ? into the political history of this civilization." In 1992 Mr. D'Souza put it this way: "Straussians have an intellectual rigor that is very attractive. They have extolled the idea of the statesman and the notion of advising the great, the prince, like Machiavelli or Aristotle. This is necessary because the prince is not always the smartest guy in the world." -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From garym at canada.com Sun Apr 6 11:49:08 2003 From: garym at canada.com (Gary Lawrence Murphy) Date: Sun Apr 6 07:48:57 2003 Subject: Project for the New American Century Message-ID: you just gotta love a good, credible conspiracy story ... Project for the New American Century is set up "to investigate, analyze, and expose the Project for the New American Century, and its plan for a 'unipolar' world." http://pnac.info/ Such gems as "DONALD Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz wrote to President Bill Clinton in 1998 urging war against Iraq and the removal of Saddam Hussein because he is a 'hazard' to 'a significant portion of the world's supply of oil'. "In the letter, Rumsfeld also calls for America to go to war alone, attacks the United Nations and says the US should not be 'crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council'. or Ramsey Clark's ... "Iraq has been a target of U.S. covert actions since at least 1958, when a popular revolution led by Abdel Kassem overthrew the Iraqi monarchy, which was installed by Britain in 1921. In 1960, the new government helped found the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, to resist Western oil monopolies.1 "The CIA plotted Kassem's assassination and U.S. generals in Turkey devised a military plan, called "Canonbone," to invade northern Iraq and seize its oil fields.2 In 1963, Kassem and thousands of supporters were massacred in a CIA-backed coup. From kelley at interpactinc.com Sun Apr 6 13:50:29 2003 From: kelley at interpactinc.com (kelley) Date: Sun Apr 6 09:48:09 2003 Subject: Project for the New American Century In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20030406115759.03f88b20@mail.interpactinc.com> Yes, if you read this stuff you will have some insight into what is going on. The war party faction has never been particularly interested in anyone's support, only in so far as it would enable military operations. You have to understand these folks as conceiving of themselves as hard-headed realists for whom power is the _only_ thing that matters. They are unabashed about this approach to foreign policy. when Rummy tells Syria and Iran, "You could be next, MFers" and Shrub replies that such an action is "Good" the war party is unashamed. This is the way it is, on their world view. Power. Unadorned. Undaunted. (Because, they say, everyone else works that way, too, and you're a naif if you think otherwise.) They believe that both Liberals and Conservatives are misguided. Democratization and shared interests and ideals simply do NOT inexorably flow from economic development, the flaw of recent foreign policy thinking. For them, both left and right mistakenly embrace "comfortable doctrines of passivity. ... How nice to imagine that merely by enriching ourselves we can spread the blessings of democracy to everyone else." (June 25, 2000 Robert Kagan, _The Washington Post_, "Springtime for Dictators." Robert Kagan's material has been most interesting to me--in terms of providing some insight into what has gone on over the past couple of years and recently. In Kagan's view, which I think represents the "war party" fairly well, there is no shame in being called cowboys. Nor are they worried about the break up of alliances. I dare say _that_ was a goal--for those alliances were built on false premises and must be sundered and rebuilt anew. They have never seen Russia as an ally (one look at papa Shrub's policy toward them or Condi Rice's statements before the election were a klew, anyway). European power was eclipsed long ago. This is the moment of Pax Americana and it must be clutched now and moved forward in order ensure that power lasts as long as possible. The means? The exercise of power as force, first, and only through money or solidarity later--if ever. Here's an excerpt that illustrates Kagan's "America is from Mars, Europe is from Venus" thinking: Given that the United States is unlikely to reduce its power and that Europe is unlikely to increase more than marginally its own power or the will to use what power it has, the future seems certain to be one of increased transatlantic tension. The danger if it is a danger is that the United States and Europe will become positively estranged. Europeans will become more shrill in their attacks on the United States. The United States will become less inclined to listen, or perhaps even to care. The day could come, if it has not already, when Americans will no more heed the pronouncements of the EU than they do the pronouncements of Asean or the Andean Pact. <...> The differing threat perceptions in the United States and Europe are not just matters of psychology, however. They are also grounded in a practical reality that is another product of the disparity of power. For Iraq and other ?rogue? states objectively do not pose the same level of threat to Europeans as they do to the United States. There is, first of all, the American security guarantee that Europeans enjoy and have enjoyed for six decades, ever since the United States took upon itself the burden of maintaining order in far-flung regions of the world ? from the Korean Peninsula to the Persian Gulf ? from which European power had largely withdrawn. Europeans generally believe, whether or not they admit it to themselves, that were Iraq ever to emerge as a real and present danger, as opposed to merely a potential danger, then the United States would do something about it ? as it did in 1991. If during the Cold War Europe by necessity made a major contribution to its own defense, today Europeans enjoy an unparalleled measure of ?free security? because most of the likely threats are in regions outside Europe, where only the United States can project effective force. In a very practical sense ? that is, when it comes to actual strategic planning ? neither Iraq nor Iran nor North Korea nor any other ?rogue? state in the world is primarily a European problem. Nor, certainly, is China. Both Europeans and Americans agree that these are primarily American problems. This is why Saddam Hussein is not as great a threat to Europe as he is to the United States. He would be a greater threat to the United States even were the Americans and Europeans in complete agreement on Iraq policy, because it is the logical consequence of the transatlantic disparity of power. The task of containing Saddam Hussein belongs primarily to the United States, not to Europe, and everyone agrees on this6 ? including Saddam, which is why he considers the United States, not Europe, his principal adversary. In the Persian Gulf, in the Middle East, and in most other regions of the world (including Europe), the United States plays the role of ultimate enforcer. ?You are so powerful,? Europeans often say to Americans. ?So why do you feel so threatened?? But it is precisely America?s great power that makes it the primary target, and often the only target. Europeans are understandably content that it should remain so. Americans are ?cowboys,? Europeans love to say. And there is truth in this. The United States does act as an international sheriff, self-appointed perhaps but widely welcomed nevertheless, trying to enforce some peace and justice in what Americans see as a lawless world where outlaws need to be deterred or destroyed, and often through the muzzle of a gun. Europe, by this old West analogy, is more like a saloonkeeper. Outlaws shoot sheriffs, not saloonkeepers. In fact, from the saloonkeeper?s point of view, the sheriff trying to impose order by force can sometimes be more threatening than the outlaws who, at least for the time being, may just want a drink. When Europeans took to the streets by the millions after September 11, most Americans believed it was out of a sense of shared danger and common interest: The Europeans knew they could be next. But Europeans by and large did not feel that way and still don?t. Europeans do not really believe they are next. They may be secondary targets ? because they are allied with the U.S. ? but they are not the primary target, because they no longer play the imperial role in the Middle East that might have engendered the same antagonism against them as is aimed at the United States. When Europeans wept and waved American flags after September 11, it was out of genuine human sympathy, sorrow, and affection for Americans. For better or for worse, European displays of solidarity were a product more of fellow-feeling than self-interest. From Power and Weakness, Robert Kagan, Policy Review, June 2002 http://www.newamericancentury.org/kagan-052002.htm see also, http://www.newamericancentury.org/Editorial_Feb.2_98.pdf (they knew Russia and France would object in 98. The song and dance with the UN was, I'm convinced, just buying time) From johnhall at isomedia.com Sun Apr 6 11:51:55 2003 From: johnhall at isomedia.com (johnhall) Date: Sun Apr 6 10:51:53 2003 Subject: Project for the New American Century In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030406115759.03f88b20@mail.interpactinc.com> Message-ID: <000801c2fc65$39f59f10$0400a8c0@JMHALL> Mr. Kelley largely gets those he titles "the war party" right. They might make points like: The international system is fundamentally Hobbesian, and can't be otherwise. To the extent it ever looks like that, it is because a great power is interested in 'quiet' and is enforcing such. Our greatest enemies in Muslim lands haven't come from the basement, but from those that have done quite well, just under the 'palace'. Not only is Shrub unashamed, but the pro-Saddam protestors re-enforce his impression that he is right. Alliances must reflect underlying realities or they wither. Of course Russia isn't an ally --> it is enough that it isn't an enemy anymore. If you want the "Pax", then the only realistic way of achieving that is "Pax Americana". This is, by the way, quite a bit better than the prior period of "Balance of Terror". The exercise of power is a last resort, but if it is to be used it should be decisive. This harkens back to more classic views in Western Civilization. The United States people are already ahead of the government on not really caring what the Europeans think anymore. I believe a European said that America "had a hammer" and so everything looked like a nail. To this classic assertion Kagan pointed out that if so the Europeans had an equivalent problem. The Europeans DID NOT have a hammer and so they didn't want to admit anything (like Iraq) was a nail. Yep, the nuts are interested in attacking the US above all. So we aren't terribly impressed by the French who want to pre-emptively surrender to buy a hope they will get eaten last. > see also, http://www.newamericancentury.org/Editorial_Feb.2_98.pdf > (they knew Russia and France would object in 98. The song and dance with > the UN was, I'm convinced, just buying time) Yes and no. The Americans knew the reality of Iraq and Saddam, something the Europeans pretended not to know. So we engaged in the farce to prove we were right. Saddam obliged. Saddam _did_ have a legitimate opportunity to prove the US was wrong. He didn't take it. I could have written a script which would have resulted in not only no invasion but no more sanctions, either. Throw the doors wide open, bus every scientist to Kuwait for interviews, destroy all the stocks. Once the oil started flowing again after sanctions, it could all be rebuilt. Saddam wasn't that smart. From colds at dydax.com Sun Apr 6 18:41:56 2003 From: colds at dydax.com (Chris Olds) Date: Sun Apr 6 14:41:43 2003 Subject: Project for the New American Century In-Reply-To: <000801c2fc65$39f59f10$0400a8c0@JMHALL> Message-ID: On Sun, 6 Apr 2003, johnhall wrote: > > Saddam _did_ have a legitimate opportunity to prove the US was wrong. > He didn't take it. I could have written a script which would have > resulted in not only no invasion but no more sanctions, either. Throw > the doors wide open, bus every scientist to Kuwait for interviews, > destroy all the stocks. > > Once the oil started flowing again after sanctions, it could all be > rebuilt. > > Saddam wasn't that smart. Even though I might be suspected of disagreeing with you as a reflex (and the difference is hard to see, even if it is there), I have to say that this scenario does seem like the optimal solution to getting out from under sanctions. Destroy everything, invite credible foreign observers to make video as you do it, give the inspectors more than they ask for, then start rebuilding after everyone leaves. So why didn't he do that? Regardless of one's opinion of his intelligence, he's a very successful player in a region with brutal power politics, and he has smart (if opportunistic ) people around him. My suspicion (w/o evidence, at this point) is that what we see as the obvious winning play wasn't available to Saddam due to cultural factors. Throwing open his secrets would be seen as weakness, and he might not survive long enough to carry out the second phase (rebuilding, again in secret). Does this mean I think the war is justified? At this point, my answer is still no. I think that it might have been possible to justify a war against Iraq, but the current war (against Saddam himself) isn't it. Not that the administration cares about justification... /cco From joe at barrera.org Sun Apr 6 18:08:43 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Sun Apr 6 17:08:25 2003 Subject: FoRK Rate Justification, and sanctions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E90C18B.7090307@barrera.org> Chris Olds wrote: > Does this mean I think the war is justified? At this point, my answer is > still no. I think that it might have been possible to justify a war > against Iraq, but the current war (against Saddam himself) isn't it. > Not that the administration cares about justification... I'm getting to the point where I believe that the war is justified if only to allow the sanctions to end. The sanctions are responsible for large scale sickness and death. Just the impact on the water supply alone has been disasterous. Just try reading some of http://www.google.com/search?q=iraq+sanctions+water+cholera and you will be sickened. Now of course you could argue that we just aren't (weren't) doing the sanctions right, and that we could have done better, in a way that would have hurt Saddam and not just the Iraqi people. But I'm not sure I believe that. Is there a recent sanctions success story? Does South Africa count, and if so, what worked in South Africa that didn't or couldn't in Iraq? At any rate, it can only be good that the sanctions are ending. And any discussion of the dead and wounded Iraqis in this war have to be compared to the number of dead and diseased that continued sanctions would have caused. - Joe From johnhall at isomedia.com Sun Apr 6 19:21:53 2003 From: johnhall at isomedia.com (johnhall) Date: Sun Apr 6 18:27:48 2003 Subject: Project for the New American Century In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000501c2fca4$15b3b490$0400a8c0@JMHALL> > From: fork-bounces@xent.com [mailto:fork-bounces@xent.com] On Behalf Of > Chris Olds > > Even though I might be suspected of disagreeing with you as a reflex ... ditto :) > So why didn't he do that? Regardless of one's opinion of his > intelligence, he's a very successful player in a region with brutal power > politics, and he has smart (if opportunistic ) people around him. > > My suspicion (w/o evidence, at this point) is that what we see as the > obvious winning play wasn't available to Saddam due to cultural factors. > Throwing open his secrets would be seen as weakness, and he might not > survive long enough to carry out the second phase (rebuilding, again in > secret). It would have been very difficult, at the least, for him to do it due to cultural reasons. But he probably could have done it and survived. But he'd rather die, for cultural reasons. ============= It is commonly accepted that the sanctions have killed about 5,000 people a month. This is in addition to the people Saddam simply kills, which might double the figure. So 5 years of Saddam probably results in 600,000 or so dead Iraqis. If we can kill his regime without killing more than that, we can argue that we did the Iraqis a favor with a straight face. Leveling the threat was the real reason. I'm sure most have noticed that a lot of terrorist infrastructure is biting the dust. From owen at permafrost.net Mon Apr 7 14:34:20 2003 From: owen at permafrost.net (Owen Byrne) Date: Mon Apr 7 09:34:22 2003 Subject: Project for the New American Century In-Reply-To: <000501c2fca4$15b3b490$0400a8c0@JMHALL> References: <000501c2fca4$15b3b490$0400a8c0@JMHALL> Message-ID: <3E91A88C.60807@permafrost.net> > > >Leveling the threat was the real reason. I'm sure most have noticed >that a lot of terrorist infrastructure is biting the dust. > > > Another oxymoron - "terrorist infrastructure." On the other hand - some would say that US army occupation is the best "infrastructure" a terrorist could want. Owen http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2003/04/07/taliban/index.html > Taliban reviving structure in Afghanistan > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > *By KATHY GANNON* > > print > e-mail > > > April 7, 2003 | KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (AP) -- Before executing the > International Red Cross worker, the Taliban gunmen made a satellite > telephone call to their superior for instructions: Kill him? > > Kill him, the order came back, and Ricardo Munguia, whose body was > found with 20 bullet wounds last month, became the first foreign aid > worker to die in Afghanistan since the Taliban's ouster from power 18 > months ago. > > The manner of his death suggests the Taliban is not only determined to > remain a force in this country, but is reorganizing and reviving its > command structure. > > There is little to stop them. The soldiers and police who were > supposed to be the bedrock of a stable postwar Afghanistan have gone > unpaid for months and are drifting away. > > At a time when the United States is promising a reconstructed > democratic postwar Iraq, many Afghans are remembering hearing similar > promises not long ago. > > Instead, what they see is thieving warlords, murder on the roads, and > a resurgence of Taliban vigilantism. > > "It's like I am seeing the same movie twice and no one is trying to > fix the problem," said Ahmed Wali Karzai, the brother of Afghanistan's > president and his representative in southern Kandahar. "What was > promised to Afghans with the collapse of the Taliban was a new life of > hope and change. But what was delivered? Nothing. Everyone is back in > business." > > Karzai said reconstruction has been painfully slow - a canal repaired, > a piece of city road paved, a small school rebuilt. > > "There have been no significant changes for people," he said. "People > are tired of seeing small, small projects. I don't know what to say to > people anymore." > > When the Taliban ruled they forcibly conscripted young men. "Today I > can say 'we don't take your sons away by force to fight at the front > line,'" Karzai remarked. "But that's about all I can say." > > From safe havens in neighboring Pakistan, aided by militant Muslim > groups there, the Taliban launched their revival to coincide with the > war in Iraq and capitalize on Muslim anger over the U.S. invasion, say > Afghan officials. > > Karzai said the Taliban are allied with rebel commander Gulbuddin > Hekmatyar, supported by Pakistan and financed by militant Arabs. > > The attacks have targeted foreigners and the threats have been > directed toward Afghans working for international organizations. > > Abdul Salam is a military commander for the government. Last month he > was stopped at a Taliban checkpoint in the Shah Wali Kot district of > Kandahar and became a witness to the killing of Munguia, a 39-year-old > water engineer from El Salvador. > > After stopping Munguia and his three-vehicle convoy, gunmen made a > phone call to Mullah Dadullah, a powerful former Taliban commander who > happens to have an artificial leg provided by the Red Cross. > > Mimicking a telephone receiver by cupping a hand on his ear, Salam > recalled the gunmen's side of the conversation. > > "I heard him say Mullah Dadullah," he said. "I heard him ask for > instructions." > > When the conversation ended the Taliban moved quickly, Salam said. > They shoved Munguia behind one of the vehicles, siphoned gasoline from > the tanks and used it to set the vehicles on fire. > > Munguia was standing nearby. One Taliban raised his Kalashnikov rifle > and fired at Manguia. > > Then they told the others: "You are working with kafirs (unbelievers). > You are slaves of Karzai and Karzai is a slave to America." > > "This time we will let you go because you are Afghan," Salam > remembered them saying, "but if we find you again and you are still > working for the government we will kill you." > > In the latest killing in southern Afghanistan, gunmen on Thursday shot > to death Haji Gilani, a close Karzai ally, in southern Uruzgan > province. Gilani was one of the first people to shelter Karzai when he > secretly entered Afghanistan to foment a rebellion against the Taliban > in late 2001. > > International workers in Kandahar don't feel safe anymore and some > have been moved from the Kandahar region to safer areas, said John > Oerum, southwest security officer for the United Nations. But Oerum is > trying to find a way to stay in southern Afghanistan. To abandon it > would be to let the rebel forces win, he says. > > The Red Cross, with 150 foreign workers in Afghanistan, have suspended > operations indefinitely. > > Today most Afghans say their National Army seems a distant dream while > the U.S.-led coalition continues to feed and finance warlords for > their help in hunting for Taliban and al-Qaida fighters. > > Karzai, the president's brother, says: "We have to pay more attention > at the district level, build the administration. We know who these > Taliban are, but we don't have the people to report them when they > return." > > Khan Mohammed, commander of Kandahar's 2nd Corps, says his soldiers > haven't been paid in seven months, and his fighting force has > dwindled. The Kandahar police chief, Mohammed Akram, said he wants 50 > extra police in each district where the Taliban have a stronghold. But > he says his police haven't been paid in months and hundreds have just > gone home. > > "There is no real administration all over Afghanistan, no army, no > police," said Mohammed. "The people do not want the Taliban, but we > have to unite and build, but we are not." > From rohit at ics.uci.edu Mon Apr 7 21:31:56 2003 From: rohit at ics.uci.edu (Rohit Khare) Date: Mon Apr 7 20:32:14 2003 Subject: Hydra Message-ID: --------------- [6] Mac OS X Tool News: Hydra 1.0 Hydra 1.0 from TheCodingMonkeys is a Rendezvous based, collaborative text editor with advanced developer support that allows several users to simultaneously work on text documents on a local network. http://hydra.globalse.org/ From joe at barrera.org Mon Apr 7 21:41:35 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Mon Apr 7 20:41:04 2003 Subject: as always, beck says it best. Message-ID: <3E9244EF.9020902@barrera.org> Today has been a fucked up day Today has been a fucked up day Today has been a fucked up day Today has been a fucked up day Looks like tomorrow it'll be the same old day Today has been a fucked up day Today has been a fucked up day Today has been a fucked up day Looks like tomorrow it'll be the same old day There's people nodding up and down the line With grocery bags on their heads And dollar bills pasted onto their faces Squigies in their hands -- "He is not seeing pretty visions. He is seeing monsters. He is losing his mind and he feels it going. There is only one escape from this discomfort." "Here we go again, we're out of our meds, out of our minds, and we want in yours, let us in..." From joe at barrera.org Mon Apr 7 21:44:29 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Mon Apr 7 20:43:59 2003 Subject: Hydra In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E92459D.4040901@barrera.org> Rohit Khare wrote: > --------------- > [6] Mac OS X Tool News: Hydra 1.0 > > Hydra 1.0 from TheCodingMonkeys is a Rendezvous based, collaborative > text editor with advanced developer support that allows several > users to simultaneously work on text documents on a local network. > http://hydra.globalse.org/ Does it require a C.mmp emulator? -- "He is not seeing pretty visions. He is seeing monsters. He is losing his mind and he feels it going. There is only one escape from this discomfort." "Here we go again, we're out of our meds, out of our minds, and we want in yours, let us in..." From tomwhore at slack.net Tue Apr 8 12:13:42 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 08:13:01 2003 Subject: Hawash Hogwash Message-ID: http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/front_page/104980314550700.xml "A federal judge acknowledged for the first time Monday that federal agents are holding an Arab American software engineer as a material witness in a terrorism investigation. >From Our Advertiser Nearly three weeks after his March 20 arrest, Maher "Mike" Hawash appeared before U.S. District Court Judge Robert E. Jones in a closed 14th-floor courtroom in the Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse in Portland. While the press and public were barred from the hearing by armed guards, Jones issued an order saying Hawash was being legally held as part of a grand jury investigation. Jones ordered prosecutors to secure Hawash's testimony directly or through a deposition by April 25 and scheduled another closed-door detention hearing for April 29. "I regret that the proceedings related to this matter must occur in a closed courtroom," Jones wrote. But he said the information needed to determine Hawash's detention status is "purportedly" the same evidence being considered by a grand jury. Hawash, born in Nablus on the West Bank and raised in Kuwait, has been a U.S. citizen since 1988. The Oregonian reported March 21 that Hawash, 38, had been arrested by the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force at his Intel office and was being held as a material witness in an investigation of an alleged terrorist cell. Hawash's involvement or knowledge of the six defendants already charged in that case is unknown. Subsequently, a group of Hawash's friends and former co-workers have used the Internet and news media to spread the word of what they say is a terrible injustice: a U.S. citizen secreted away by government agents without explanation or public scrutiny. In the past week, Hawash's case has become known across the country as one of the few known examples of the Bush administration's expanding use of the material witness law in the name of national security, though dozens of people reportedly have been arrested under the law since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The use of the 1984 material witness statutes to hold people without charging them is not a new phenomenon. It was designed to compel grand jury or trial testimony from frightened or reluctant witnesses, and historically it has been used in organized crime or alien smuggling cases. But since the attacks, the law has been used more frequently to detain people, sometimes indefinitely. In defending the tactic, Attorney General John Ashcroft has called the law vital to stopping new terrorist attacks. The Justice Department has refused to divulge the number of people held as material witnesses in the war on terror. Arrest not acknowledged Despite media requests, the government never publicly acknowledged Hawash's arrest. There was no public court record of it or of the searches of his home and office. And his name was stripped from a federal prison Web site after prosecutors learned it was there. Defense attorneys, civil libertarians and open-government advocates argue that increased use of the material witness statutes, combined with other expanded law enforcement techniques, has created an unprecedented level of secrecy in a court system built on the basic pillar of openness. Sarah Margon, a policy analyst for the Center for National Security Studies in Washington, D.C., said the center has documented at least 25 cases in which material witnesses arrested after Sept 11 were later charged with criminal violations. "It seems to me to be a stretching of the material witness statute," she said. "It's very important that the government goes after suspected terrorists and that the nation is secure, but I don't think that security has to be exchanged for liberty." Margie Paris, a professor at the University of Oregon Law School, said secrecy in grand jury proceedings is normal and legal. Using the material witness statute to preserve someone's testimony is proper, she said. "It is not lawful to arrest people and detain them because you think you're going to be able to charge them or if you think they're involved in some activity, and you want to stop them," she said. The trouble with secrecy The trouble with Hawash's case, said Susan Mandiberg, a professor at Lewis & Clark Law School, is that secrecy is preventing the public from assessing exactly what's happening, fueling speculation. "Whenever there's a lack of information, it makes it possible that people will think the worst," she said. The possibilities run the gamut, from Hawash negotiating an immunity deal to the government making random arrests in a totalitarian fashion, she said. Such concerns prompted Maher Hawash's friends and supporters to gather peacefully Monday in a spring drizzle on the granite steps of the federal courthouse. They held signs asking for Hawash's release and hoped that he knew he hadn't been forgotten. Others were concerned about the erosion of civil liberties. Mike and Maria Prescott came from Aurora to protest. "We're just appalled at what the government is resorting to," Maria Prescott said. "This isn't what America is supposed to be." Others who worship with Hawash at the Bilal Mosque in Beaverton said there is fear in the Muslim community. One man, who spoke through an interpreter, asked that his name not be used. "If there is no justice, then this thing may end up spilling over to more Muslims in this country," he said. "We ask for justice for all the people." Mark Larabee: 503-294-7664; marklarabee@news.oregonian.com " From jbone at deepfile.com Tue Apr 8 11:26:31 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Tue Apr 8 08:26:02 2003 Subject: Hydra In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <79D416EF-69D6-11D7-A9D0-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Ro, help me out. I looked at this a week or so ago... it seems cool, but for the life of me I can't figure out why. The editor itself is decent, but do multiple people ever really need to collaborate on a single piece of text at one time? The write-up mentions XP, but I have no idea how to do pair programming unless the pair is physically co-located --- most of the benefit is in the verbal exchange, the whiteboard scribbles, etc. --- and this does not address that. It does eliminate the "four hands, one keyboard" problem --- but is that really a problem in pair programming? I dunno. How are you going to use it? jb On Monday, Apr 7, 2003, at 22:31 US/Central, Rohit Khare wrote: > --------------- > [6] Mac OS X Tool News: Hydra 1.0 > > Hydra 1.0 from TheCodingMonkeys is a Rendezvous based, collaborative > text editor with advanced developer support that allows several > users to simultaneously work on text documents on a local network. > http://hydra.globalse.org/ From tomwhore at slack.net Tue Apr 8 12:59:47 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 08:59:07 2003 Subject: Hydra In-Reply-To: <79D416EF-69D6-11D7-A9D0-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Message-ID: I think we have been here before. The idea that colaborative work can happen over the air in such a loose manner that folks can move in and move out of the workgroup simply by either physical moving intot he cloud or netologicaly moving into the cloud. As with everything I have to memeout Xerox, but thats the obvious child. Now as to Zeroconf itself (rendevouz as apple is trying to brand it), I am not sold on it. Sure DHCP and the like are big ugly beasts but zeroconf seems to be able to work best only on small local, very local, scales as too big too much will cause the AppleTalk Chatter Effect that can saturate the air with "HI IM here" "HI IM here too" "Hi Im here and Im a refrigerator" "HI I need a fridge to tell me what time it is" "HI Im a watch and I want to know who has the beer" "HI Im still here" "HI IM still here too" "HI" "HI" "SHUT UP im trying to dl a divx" Sure essids do that, but thats on the AP level of which there are less than the number of clients (usualy) and thus less messy. I know this is a turnaway from my usual "Decentralize everything NOW!!" scree but in this regard I think as of now, with the gear we are dealing with, Zerconf is just too noisy and messy for anything larger than say a bluetooth level cloud. But putting this on 802.11whatever, and giventhe tredn of everyone hoppingthier antennas up with cans, pigtails and boosters, is simply going to make things as soggy as a cardboard cowboy walking around Portland in March. Squish Squish. Please set me arights if I am off the mark. I seek to learn. -tomwsmf From dl at silcom.com Tue Apr 8 09:55:56 2003 From: dl at silcom.com (Dave Long) Date: Tue Apr 8 09:49:31 2003 Subject: future memes In-Reply-To: Message from fork-request@xent.com of "Sat, 05 Apr 2003 12:00:05 PST." <20030405200005.F325C15DC25E@xent.com> Message-ID: <200304081555.IAA15998@maltesecat> >"The future is (already?) here, it's just not widely distributed." "The beauty of the future is that there are so many to choose from." Is the appeal of the bleeding edge that one gets to experience so many more futures during any given time? -Dave :: :: :: > Does it require a C.mmp emulator? With apologies to Mr. Peoples: > I've run code you people wouldn't believe -- expert systems on fire > off the shoulder of Orion -- I watched capability lists glittering in > the dark at Tannhauser Gate. All those futures will be lost in time, > like tears in rain. From sati_home at yahoo.com Tue Apr 8 11:10:08 2003 From: sati_home at yahoo.com (sateesh narahari) Date: Tue Apr 8 10:09:39 2003 Subject: future memes In-Reply-To: <200304081555.IAA15998@maltesecat> Message-ID: <20030408171008.65850.qmail@web14006.mail.yahoo.com> > Is the appeal of the bleeding edge > that one gets to experience so many > more futures during any given time? The appeal is that it lets you forget the painful present and past mistakes by living in future. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com From tomwhore at slack.net Tue Apr 8 14:38:55 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 10:38:13 2003 Subject: future memes In-Reply-To: <20030408171008.65850.qmail@web14006.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Part of the pull of "the future" for me is that its a chance to do something that has yet to be co-opted by Govs, Committies, or the MassMarketing Dumbdown. "The Future" though in this sense is actualy the present before it gets spread out too far or more aptly to the forces mentioned above. Many folks use "the future" to write history in thier own image before it has a chance to be spolied by actualy happening. "the Future" is Schrodengers cat in every state and no state thus anystate the viewer/writter wants to trap the poor kitty in. One thign is for sure, the future is not what it used to be. -tomwsmf From fork at ordersomewherechaos.com Tue Apr 8 11:46:50 2003 From: fork at ordersomewherechaos.com (RossO) Date: Tue Apr 8 10:46:07 2003 Subject: Hydra In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <13A0F5AD-69EA-11D7-8E9E-00039344DDD6@ordersomewherechaos.com> > Now as to Zeroconf itself (rendevouz as apple is trying to brand it), > I am > not sold on it. Sure DHCP and the like are big ugly beasts but zeroconf > seems to be able to work best only on small local, very local, scales > as > too big too much will cause the AppleTalk Chatter Effect... ZC/R is not meant for anything outside of your own LAN. It's great behind a NAT. From: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/wireless/2002/12/20/zeroconf.html Zeroconf relies on what is called Multicast DNS. Say you are at a party and you need to talk to a woman named Suzy. Unicast DNS is like asking the host of the party who she is; multicast DNS is like shouting "Is Suzy here?" to the whole room. Naturally, things would get awfully loud if it was a big party, but Zeroconf was designed for small local networks, so it isn't a problem. And best of all, no one person has to know everyone in the room -- being a host is tough, and it's the user who usually ends up with the job. Service discovery uses the same broadcast mechanism, but instead of looking for a particular person, you look for capabilities. It's like yelling out, "Anyone here know how to mix a Tequila Sunrise?" and waiting to see who puts their hand up. This particular bit of magic is accomplished via a seldom-used DNS packet, lovingly named SRV. The SRV packet was originally designed to locate a service over the open Internet. To find Apple's Web server, theoretically, your Web browser would query for "_http._tcp.apple.com". If anyone actually used the SRV functionality, a DNS server would reply with a list of HTTP (Web) servers and some other useful information, such as in which order you should try them. Zeroconf takes this capability and makes it work on the home network. Say a word processor wanted to know what printers were on a network. It would broadcast a query for "_lpr._tcp.local.arpa" to every device on the network (LPR is a common printing protocol). Any printer that heard it would respond with a SRV packet with its name and whatever information that it felt like giving about its capabilities (color, pages per minute, etc.). From tomwhore at slack.net Tue Apr 8 15:08:25 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 11:07:44 2003 Subject: Hydra In-Reply-To: <13A0F5AD-69EA-11D7-8E9E-00039344DDD6@ordersomewherechaos.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, RossO wrote: --]> seems to be able to work best only on small local, very local, scales --]> as too big too much will cause the AppleTalk Chatter Effect... --] --]ZC/R is not meant for anything outside of your own LAN. It's great --]behind a NAT. --] Yep, I read the Oriely article a while ago as well as a few others and thus came to my conclusions. Homecloud would be good but even still if you are running other stuff across the same freqs it could get a bit noisy. A little more detials on my particular situation. I have a Linksys 802.11b AP (the big old BEFW11S4) sitting inthe middle of the house with Wep on and its Essid broadcasst turned off for a bit of security (not fooling myself though and use of ssh/ssl is always used when it can be). This is connected to my DSLbox for connectivity to the "Internet". Around the house I have at least 5 computers all doing the dhcp lease thing to the HomeAp for access. I have another BEFW11S4 that has been weatherproofed and eventualy will be housed on the roof with a nice sized omni. This is set for no wep, an open broadcasting Essid (www.personaltelco.net), a differnt channel than the HomeAP and has a large lengthof cat5 heading back down into the house and into a Linux box that also has an 802.11b card that is set to talk to the HomeAP. Internal to the linuxbox will be, when I finsih getting it worked out right, a set of apps and rules such that folks who want to be using the RoofAP will be able to get to all the resources of the Linuxbox as well as be able to use its connectivy to the HomeAP such that they can have some amount of access to the "Internet". NoCat will help in having them hit an "I agree not to ruin your set up on penalty of being whipped silly" as well as some amount of bandwidth shaping..theorecticaly that is as I have only heard of one person getting the shaping aspect working. Unlike "wifi hotspots" Im more into doing local stuff like mirrors to Project Guttenberg, a squid cache, community based blogs that sort of stuff. yea go "Internet" for some stuff, but its not the only focus. Now the deal is when and if folks amble up and use the RoofAP I dont want it to saturate the HomeAP's goodness and vice versa. Ive got the channel sperattion set as wide as it can go to prevent any channel clutter. With Zeroconf though I can see lots of squak and talk across the air that would degrade things some acorss both the HomeAP and the RoofAP. SO even just local it has its drawbacks. Another strike on Zeroconf is its OS implimentations. fom what I am reading the MS workings of it totaly beat up on other implimentations to the point of needsing throttlers to quiet it down. Ewwww. Im sure over time and complience things might get better, but for now though a combo of DHCP, nocat and the like seem the way to go for what I need. -tomwsmf From khare at alumni.caltech.edu Tue Apr 8 15:57:43 2003 From: khare at alumni.caltech.edu (khare@alumni.caltech.edu) Date: Tue Apr 8 11:50:38 2003 Subject: NYTimes.com Article: Silicon Valley Hikes Wireless Frontier Message-ID: <20030408185743.5C2D98491@web39t.prvt.nytimes.com> This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by khare@alumni.caltech.edu. Pretty mild as PC Forum wrapup stories go... Steve's right on in surveying the *broad* landscape for lay readers (well, Times readers). And Wildseed itself might individually be interesting, but the article is pervesely arguing why another Microsoft *won't* emerge here. In fact, there's still no good answer for a peer-to-peer occasionally-connected / nomadic architecture. Watch this space... Rohit khare@alumni.caltech.edu Silicon Valley Hikes Wireless Frontier April 7, 2003 By STEVE LOHR Eric Engstrom spent seven lucrative and exhilarating years at Microsoft - working on big projects, making a name for himself, even testifying on the company's behalf in its federal antitrust trial. But in 2000, Mr. Engstrom walked away from Microsoft and the personal computer industry, which seemed to have settled into maturity. He founded his own company and set off to pursue innovation and riches elsewhere. "The opportunities are out on the edge, and the edge of software development has got to be the phone," said Mr. Engstrom, 38, the chief executive of Wildseed, a start-up in Kirkland, Wash. Mr. Engstrom personifies the migration of talent, excitement and investment in computing toward the wireless business as cellphones become more like computers and hand-held computers morph into phones. To veterans of past cycles in technology, the wireless world today has the look of the personal computer business in the late 1970's or the Internet in the early 1990's. "It's starting to happen, it's getting exciting again," observed Esther Dyson, who plays host to PC Forum, an annual gathering of technology executives, entrepreneurs and venture capitalists that was held late last month in Scottsdale, Ariz. PC Forum began in 1977. But now the PC stands not for "personal computer" but "Platforms for Communication." The economics of wireless is still unclear and technology standards are not yet in place. Nor does the move to wireless computing spell the death of the personal computer, any more than the rise of the PC meant the demise of the mainframe computer. But as wireless telephony and computing combine, the center of gravity in digital technology is clearly shifting. "People see the PC as played out, and they are looking for new technology platforms to build new businesses on," said Brad Silverberg, a former senior Microsoft executive who left three years ago and is the founder of Ignition, a venture capital firm that has invested in wireless businesses, including Mr. Engstrom's start-up. The wireless convergence of phones and computers is made possible by steady progress in chip making, memory and miniaturization. Today's advanced cellphones have the equivalent computing power of the desktop PC's of the mid-1990's. Yet while the trend of advancing technology is clear, little else is apparent. What companies, products, services and technology standards will emerge as leaders in the wireless arena is still uncertain. And that is because the real competition has barely begun. More than 450 million cellphones will be sold worldwide this year, industry analysts predict. But less than 10 percent of those will be the cellphone-computer hybrids - sometimes called smart phones - that can handle not just short text messages, but also send and receive e-mail, display color photos and video, play music and games with rich graphics, and browse the Web. "These hand-held smart phones are the frontier, but we're just getting to the point where they are beginning to be widely distributed," said Berge Ayvazian, president of the Yankee Group, a research firm. The wireless computing field today resembles the PC business a quarter of a century ago: people were excited by the opportunities, technology standards were not yet established, start-ups proliferated and many failed as the economy was in doldrums. "It feels eerily similar in some ways," said David Nagel, a former executive at Apple Computer and now the chief executive of PalmSource, whose Palm operating system is used on some smart phones. "But this new era in computing is much more complicated." The added complexity is the result of a number of forces - government regulation of telecommunications, multiple layers of competing technologies, and an unruly crowd of major telecommunications carriers, computer companies, cellphone makers and upstarts in all these fields vying for a piece of the business. Competing technology standards in wireless is one source of industry uncertainty. At the level of "radio protocols" for handling calls and data exchange, there are currently two main standards - the global system for mobile, or GSM, and code division multiple access, or CDMA. Qualcomm, a wireless technology company based in San Diego, developed CDMA, and its users include Sprint, Verizon Wireless, all of South Korea, and several other companies overseas. GSM was a standard nurtured in Europe, and its champions include Nokia and other European companies, AT&T Wireless, Cingular and T-Mobile in the United States. About three-fourths of cellphone subscribers worldwide use GSM. In the United States, about 40 percent of subscribers use CDMA. Meanwhile competition for the software to animate the new hybrid computer-phones is just getting under way. An early leader is the operating system made by Symbian, a British company with several cellphone makers as investors, including Nokia, Motorola, Siemens and Sony Ericcson. But Microsoft is pushing its Stinger operating system, Qualcomm has Brew, PalmSource offers Palm, and the freely distributed Linux is starting to gain adherents, too. Sun Microsystems and I.B.M. are promoting software based on Java, which Sun created, as a layer that can run on any operating system. These different approaches - whether operating systems or Java - are a step toward a more "open" technology platform for the cellphone business. In the past, each cellphone maker typically had its own embedded operating system tailored for its phones. The new generation of wireless operating systems can run on devices made by various manufacturers. In the PC industry, the business took off when software developers had a standard operating system that ran on standard silicon chips, which became a technology platform on which many thousands of applications, from business programs to games, were built. Those standards for the PC industry came to be dominated by Microsoft's Windows operating system and Intel's microprocessor. In wireless computing, most analysts expect the number of software platforms to diminish over the next few years, but with no single technology ruling the industry as Microsoft does in PC's. Indeed, Microsoft's strength in the PC market has somewhat worked against it in the wireless field as handset makers in particular seek software alternatives like Symbian and Java. Cellphone makers say they want to avoid being beholden to Microsoft, which owns the crucial Windows software for PC's and collects much of the industry's profits. Sun Microsystems estimates that 75 million cellphones with Java technology were shipped last year. "We're way ahead of Microsoft in the wireless market," said Mark Tolliver, Sun's chief strategy officer. "We're building a big platform, attracting a developer community and creating a business opportunity for companies in the wireless industry." Microsoft, too, sees plenty of opportunity. Its strategy seems to rely on bringing the familiar desktop functions of e-mail, address lists, calendar programs and Web browsing to the new smart phones. It hopes eventually to persuade a portion of the millions of software developers who write programs that run on Windows, mostly specialized software for use inside corporations, to write applications tailored for Microsoft's smart phone operating system. "We're all entering a market that doesn't really exist yet," said Ed Suwanjindar, a product manager at Microsoft. Indeed, there are many obstacles still to be overcome. Financially strained telecommunications companies have been reluctant to invest in the high-speed wireless technology needed to deliver video clips and other multimedia to smart phones with color screens. One of the reasons European carriers are so burdened with debt is that they spent more than $100 billion merely to license the radio spectrum needed for high-speed, third-generation wireless, or 3G. South Korea and Japan are the leaders in embracing 3G technology. As a less costly transition step, a number of companies are working on software that would link cellphone networks with Wi-Fi, also known as wireless fidelity, the increasingly popular technology that uses unlicensed radio spectrum to deliver high-speed Internet access wirelessly to notebook computers. The software would allow high-speed links near local Wi-Fi hubs and lower-speed connections to the Internet elsewhere in a service described as "seamless roaming" by Rod Atkins, general manager of I.B.M.'s pervasive computing unit. The entrepreneurial programmers writing for the wireless market want their software, from games to business applications, to be distributed as widely as possible. "We're on the cusp of the mobile Internet experience, but the key is going to be making sure the technological architecture of this world is open," said William Plummer, Nokia's vice president for government and industry affairs. "The better it is for developers to write programs or services that work with many handsets and across networks globally, the better off we will all be." Last June, the Open Mobile Alliance was created to further that goal. Its 16 founding companies include Nokia, Motorola, I.B.M., Microsoft and Sun, and the alliance now has 300 corporate members. The group is pushing to reach agreement on technology standards so that wireless computing can, like the Internet, work as an open network where data, voice and video can be passed among many telecommunications carriers and devices. A year ago, for example, it was difficult to send short text messages between carriers. No longer. Today, multimedia messages carrying photos, animation or music files can only be exchanged with someone who has the same kind of cellphone over the same network. Within a year, that barrier may also fall away. Start-ups like Wildseed see enough promise in the wireless sector to press ahead. The company has designed specialized software and cellphone "skins" that change the look and operation of a smart phone so that it can combine a phone with a gaming machine, music player or video platform - tailored to a person's favorite games, rock stars, sports teams or fashion tastes. Besides having different colors and styles, the skins, or faceplates, also have embedded chips storing specific Wildseed software. Its backbone software is also loaded on the cellphone. The company hopes to attract 12- to 24-year-olds, and its first products are coming to market later this year on smart phones made by Kyocera Wireless of Japan and early next year by Curitel of South Korea. Wildseed plans to charge $25 to $50 for its themed "smart skins" as well as charging carriers and cellphone makers a license fee for its software. While expectations are high, there's also a healthy dose of realism in the wireless world. As Michael Kwatinetz, who for years was a leading PC analyst on Wall Street and is now one of Wildseed's venture backers, observed, "You can get the trends right, but the timing wrong." The operating style for start-ups these days is far different from the free-spending days of the dot-com boom years of the late 1990's. On the subject of company perks, Todd Ferkingstad, a 33-year-old engineer who left Microsoft to join Wildseed, cited the takeout dinners provided on "work-late Tuesdays," when the programmers stay into the night. "That's about as extravagant as we get," he said. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/07/technology/07CELL.html?ex=1050828263&ei=1&en=59744c3f7fa16628 HOW TO ADVERTISE --------------------------------- For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company From fork at ordersomewherechaos.com Tue Apr 8 13:01:04 2003 From: fork at ordersomewherechaos.com (RossO) Date: Tue Apr 8 12:00:28 2003 Subject: Hydra In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <72BE197B-69F4-11D7-8E9E-00039344DDD6@ordersomewherechaos.com> > Now as to Zeroconf itself (rendevouz as apple is trying to brand it), > I am > not sold on it. Sure DHCP and the like are big ugly beasts but zeroconf > seems to be able to work best only on small local, very local, scales > as > too big too much will cause the AppleTalk Chatter Effect... ZC/R is not meant for anything outside of your own LAN. It's great behind a NAT. From: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/wireless/2002/12/20/zeroconf.html Zeroconf relies on what is called Multicast DNS. Say you are at a party and you need to talk to a woman named Suzy. Unicast DNS is like asking the host of the party who she is; multicast DNS is like shouting "Is Suzy here?" to the whole room. Naturally, things would get awfully loud if it was a big party, but Zeroconf was designed for small local networks, so it isn't a problem. And best of all, no one person has to know everyone in the room -- being a host is tough, and it's the user who usually ends up with the job. Service discovery uses the same broadcast mechanism, but instead of looking for a particular person, you look for capabilities. It's like yelling out, "Anyone here know how to mix a Tequila Sunrise?" and waiting to see who puts their hand up. This particular bit of magic is accomplished via a seldom-used DNS packet, lovingly named SRV. The SRV packet was originally designed to locate a service over the open Internet. To find Apple's Web server, theoretically, your Web browser would query for "_http._tcp.apple.com". If anyone actually used the SRV functionality, a DNS server would reply with a list of HTTP (Web) servers and some other useful information, such as in which order you should try them. Zeroconf takes this capability and makes it work on the home network. Say a word processor wanted to know what printers were on a network. It would broadcast a query for "_lpr._tcp.local.arpa" to every device on the network (LPR is a common printing protocol). Any printer that heard it would respond with a SRV packet with its name and whatever information that it felt like giving about its capabilities (color, pages per minute, etc.). From ejw at cse.ucsc.edu Tue Apr 8 13:09:48 2003 From: ejw at cse.ucsc.edu (Jim Whitehead) Date: Tue Apr 8 12:13:00 2003 Subject: Hydra In-Reply-To: <79D416EF-69D6-11D7-A9D0-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Message-ID: > Ro, help me out. I looked at this a week or so ago... it seems cool, > but for the life of me I can't figure out why. The project icon and homepage have nice graphic design. > The editor itself is > decent, but do multiple people ever really need to collaborate on a > single piece of text at one time? The predominant collaborative writing mode is turn-taking. However, there are several compelling scenarios where you might want to have simultaneous collaborative authoring. Finishing up a proposal right before a deadline is one such case. > The write-up mentions XP, but I have > no idea how to do pair programming unless the pair is physically > co-located --- most of the benefit is in the verbal exchange, the > whiteboard scribbles, etc. --- and this does not address that. There is starting to be some research on distributed pair programming -- Brian Hanks at UCSC is doing his PhD research on this subject. > I think we have been here before. Yes, definitely. See: http://www.cse.ucsc.edu/~ejw/collab/ It has a pretty comprehensive list of collaborative authoring research and systems. A close analog is NTE (Network Text Editor) http://www-mice.cs.ucl.ac.uk/multimedia/software/nte/ - Jim From jbone at deepfile.com Tue Apr 8 15:43:05 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Tue Apr 8 12:42:30 2003 Subject: Planet of the [Extinct] Apes Message-ID: <512E9B6C-69FA-11D7-A9D0-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> This is sad... I guess we win. http://ens-news.com/ens/apr2003/2003-04-08-10.asp jb From jamesr at best.com Tue Apr 8 14:04:34 2003 From: jamesr at best.com (James Rogers) Date: Tue Apr 8 13:03:58 2003 Subject: NYTimes.com Article: Silicon Valley Hikes Wireless Frontier In-Reply-To: <20030408185743.5C2D98491@web39t.prvt.nytimes.com> Message-ID: <002e01c2fe0a$14541ce0$f200000a@avalon> From: khare@alumni.caltech.edu > > Pretty mild as PC Forum wrapup stories go... Steve's right on > in surveying the *broad* landscape for lay readers (well, > Times readers). And Wildseed itself might individually be > interesting, but the article is pervesely arguing why another > Microsoft *won't* emerge here. For better or worse, I think there is good reason to believe that the market will consolidate down to only a very small number of players, though I have my doubts these players will be any of the existing "big" companies to any great extent. The problem is a serious lack of standardization behind the front-end facade of protocols like 802.11, Canopy, and similar. For strict IP access this is not a problem, but when they start talking about things like ubiquitous multimedia over wireless there are a lot of critical components and architecture decisions hidden in the backend of that network that are required to make more sophisticated content scale geographically and work well in general. The companies that can invest in and coordinate somewhat sophisticated content layers across a broad network early on will trump the hodge-podge of small raw IP wireless providers even if there is ubiquitous protocol compatibility (e.g. Wi-Fi) that lets people roam. What you end up with is a scenario where all the small providers will essentially have to become a client network of one of the major providers with the sophisticated content infrastructure to be commercially competitive. For basic Internet usage like we have today this isn't as much of an issue, but when you start talking about things like broadcast quality media, it becomes a big issue. If consumers have the choice between subscribing to a roam-able wireless service that offers, say, broadcast quality VOD as a feature and one that doesn't, I would guess that most consumers would buy into the wireless provider that is tied into an infrastructure with this value added. The reason this has to do with "standardization" is that you run into a lot of constraints when trying to integrate the sea of small wireless providers on the backend. There is almost nothing in place that allows small wireless providers to peer with content infrastructure providers or to be their own CIPs, and many have designed their networks in such a way that such peering is effectively impossible. It simply hasn't been a design consideration for the most part because it hasn't been a pressing issue yet. I'm already seeing the beginning of the scenario where many of the small wireless networks are vassals or franchises of the content infrastructure provider who are themselves wireless providers. "IPTV" and similar architecture sensitive services are coming of age VERY fast right now and the inability of many small wireless providers to adapt to these services will eventually kill them or force them to "sell out". Consumers will want things like IPTV and this sets the stage for a market that will end up with only a few major players pulling most of the strings. My outlook is that the myriad of small wireless providers will flourish for a little while (particularly since so much venture capital is being dumped into them right now), but the inability of these services to effectively deliver the rapidly advancing generation of more advanced content will create a situation in the market where they are either annexed or marginalized by those that can. Either way, a natural monopoly will emerge. If I was investing venture capital, I would skip the pure wireless provider plays and put the money in wireless providers that were building serious content infrastructure support into their networks, of which there are actually very few. My US$0.02, -James Rogers jamesr@best.com From tomwhore at slack.net Tue Apr 8 17:07:38 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 13:06:58 2003 Subject: Planet of the [Extinct] Apes In-Reply-To: <512E9B6C-69FA-11D7-A9D0-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, Jeff Bone wrote: --] --]This is sad... I guess we win. It is a sad thing that the major population centers for the apes fall on a continent of humans who are far less human then the apes. Years of brutal slaughter of thier own kind through murder and resource limititations should be clear signs that the apes dont stand a chance inthe long run. When human life is seen as cheap animal life will always be cheaper. From jbone at deepfile.com Tue Apr 8 16:08:40 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Tue Apr 8 13:08:02 2003 Subject: Okay, that's it, I'm one step closer to ex-pat'ing! Message-ID: From the Beeb: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1854922.stm America's Attorney General, John Ashcroft, has taken his fondness for morning prayer meetings at the US Department of Justice one step further - he is asking his staff to start the day by singing patriotic songs he wrote himself. The move has alarmed employees, who seem less than taken with their bosses' musical skills. Mr Ashcroft himself gives a gutsy rendition of his own tune, Let the Eagle Soar, whose title reflects the song's patriotic spirit. "Have you heard the song? It really sucks" -- Department of Justice lawyer The deeply Christian attorney general, fired by the country's wartime spirit, has begun distributing printouts of the lyrics to his tune at Justice Department meetings so that his staff can join in. --- I am at a loss. No, I'm not. This is not NORMAL. Does anybody else think this is unacceptably WEIRD behavior of a top U.S. exec? We have completely lost it as a nation. How, how, how did these nuts get empowered? How can we stop the insanity? It's been like a continuous, 24x7 Saturday Night Live skit since Clinton was impeached --- a really BAD, outlandish SNL skit that just keeps getting more and more bizarre. STOP THE INSANITY! This is INSANE, people --- fucking ridiculous! This man --- this whole administration --- is deeply mentally disturbed. We should make demonstrable mental health a prerequisite for public office! I mean, isn't it already? WTF? I wish I worked for the AG. If I did, I would tell him "Fuck you, you fucking wacko moron. Go straight to the hell you believe in, you fucking nutball, I'm not singing your retarded song. You are a fucking dinosaur living in a distorted, delusional, pathological, DANGEROUS 'Father Knows Best' fundamentalist fantasy land." Jesus Christ on a freakin' stick. I mean, really. Uncle! I give! Just please make it stop! jb From tomwhore at slack.net Tue Apr 8 17:17:24 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 13:16:40 2003 Subject: Planet of the [Extinct] Apes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The lovley Republic Of Congo, home of the apes.... "On Thursday, about 1,000 members of the Hema ethnic group were killed, reportedly by fighters of the rival Lendu tribe, during a three-hour attack on some 15 villages in the Ituri region." ``50,000 people may have been killed in the region since the war-within-a-war began in 1999,'' said the IRIN report, which described Ituri as a ``dangerous patchwork of military occupation and control.'' http://www.utusan.com.my/utusan/content.asp?y=2003&dt=0409&pub=Utusan_Express&sec=World&pg=wo_02.htm From tomwhore at slack.net Tue Apr 8 17:21:50 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 13:21:06 2003 Subject: Okay, that's it, I'm one step closer to ex-pat'ing! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dude, Ashcroft wrapped Justice up in some frock, you think he is not insane? The guy cant even see a naked breast without falling to his knees and doing a hairshirt trick. -tomwsmf From tomwhore at slack.net Tue Apr 8 17:33:49 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 13:33:05 2003 Subject: Okay, that's it, I'm one step closer to ex-pat'ing! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Oh it gets better http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story/0,7369,661458,00.html The performance (which can be seen and heard at cnn.com/video/us/2002/02/25/ashcroft.sings.wbtv.med.html) was accompanied only by taped music, but Mr Ashcroft's staff are complaining that printed versions of the song are being distributed at meetings so that they will be able to join in. When asked why she opposed the workplace singalong, one of the department's lawyers said: "Have you heard the song? It really sucks." A group of Hispanic justice department employees were recently summoned to see the attorney general, and went along hoping that their boss might be making a special effort to promote diversity in the department's higher ranks. Instead, they were asked to provide a hasty Spanish lesson to give the secretary a few phrases to use on a foreign delegation the next day. The Hispanic staff were then handed printed copies of Let the Eagle Soar and asked for volunteers to translate it. This is not the first time Mr Ashcroft's subordinates have realised that this attorney general is unlike ordinary politicians. Each time he has been sworn in to political office, he is anointed with cooking oil (in the manner of King David, as he points out in his memoirs Lessons from a Father to His Son). When Mr Ashcroft was in the Senate, the duty was performed by his father, a senior minister in a church specialising in speaking in tongues, the Pentecostal Assemblies of God. When he became attorney general, Clarence Thomas, a supreme court justice, did the honours. .... ... Perhaps the most bizarre wrinkle in the Ashcroft enigma emerged in November when Andrew Tobias, the Democratic Party treasurer and a financial writer, published an article on his website accusing the attorney general of harbouring superstitions about tabby cats. According to the Tobias article, advance teams for an Ashcroft visit to the US embassy in the Hague asked anxiously if there were tabby cats (or calico cats as they are known in the US) on the premises. "Their boss, they explained, believes calico cats are signs of the devil," Mr Tobias reported. When asked about the veracity of the report, the justice department said that it had made Mr Ashcroft laugh. There has been no further comment on the matter. From tomwhore at slack.net Tue Apr 8 17:40:14 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 13:39:30 2003 Subject: More Ashcroft Message-ID: http://www.internetweekly.org/iwr/parody_john_ashcroft.html Washington (IWR Satire) - Attorney General John Ashcroft today shutdown several popular Internet parody sites as part of a new crack down on "terrorist" satire. "We have been monitoring the anti-American lampoon sites "The Onion", "All Hat and No Cattle" and "Whitehouse.org" for over 14 months now. Not only do these sick people mock our President, his policies, the First Lady and our God, Jesus Christ, but they also mock me, my singing, my programs, my bowling style and even my phobia of calico cats! I mean, only a terrorist could be that cruel to torment a megalomaniac like myself, but now, thanks to my keen foresight, these so-called sardonic activities have been outlawed as part of the new wartime Patriot Act III. These sacrilegious punks think that poking fun at our Commander and Chief or Vice President during war time is a first amendment right, but that's where they are dead wrong. The first amendment now only applies to neoconservative Republicans! If you want laughs, go to Rush Limbaugh's site. Now there's a funny guy!," said Mr. Ashcroft to a standing ovation from the Washington Press corps. From jbone at deepfile.com Tue Apr 8 16:47:10 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Tue Apr 8 13:46:35 2003 Subject: [SPORK] Political Underwriting Funds Message-ID: <44ED8574-6A03-11D7-A9D0-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Okay, so we've got PACs, and look where that's gotten us. So here's a new idea: The Political Underwriting Fund, or PUF. Here's how it works: (1) Set up a 501(c)3 [whatever] corp. (2) Set up multiple PayPal accts for said corp, 1 per politician / issue of interest (3) Define release criteria for funds that accumulate in said account These could be used in various ways. For example, I'm sure there are 50M Americans that would pay $1 on the prospect of paying George W. Bush to step down from office. Would $50M do the trick? No idea. Even if it did not, the interest accumulated on that money could be used to prop up the war chests of other candidates, buy stock in FOX News in order to exercise shareholder control, etc. The only problem with paying politicians to resign is that, of course, it encourages even worse political mischief. (Well, that and the fact that if you bought Bush off, you'd have to work your way pretty far down the line of succession before you got to a desirable candidate.) But PUFs could be used in more traditional PAC-like ways, too. The key difference between PACs and PUFs is that PUFs are fine-grained, issue-focused, Web-friendly, and extremely low-friction. You don't have to buy into an entire "bundled" agenda to toss a little pocket change towards making the world a better place. Thoughts? jb From tomwhore at slack.net Tue Apr 8 17:55:57 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 13:55:14 2003 Subject: [SPORK] Fahrenheit 911. Message-ID: Who should be reading FORK? ---------------------------------------------------- http://www.indiewire.com/biz/biz_030331moore.html Stagehands may get the chance to boo Michael Moore a second time at Oscar 2005. Moore has found a surprising production company, Mel Gibson's Icon Productions to back his next film "Fahrenheit 911." The new documentary will be no less controversial than the Oscar-winning "Bowling for Columbine." "The primary thrust of the film is what happened to the country since Sept. 11 and how the Bush administration used this tragic event to push its agenda," commented Moore in an interview with Variety. "It certainly does deal with the Bush and bin Laden ties. It asks a number of questions that I don't have the answers to yet, but which I intend to find out." The potential furor around the new film and the tumult surrounding Moore's Oscar night speech did nothing to deter bidders for "Fahrenheit 911." Variety called the sale, which ended with Icon's bid of more than $10 million up front and potential back end, a "fevered auction." Gibson, a staunch Republican, put politics aside, apparently swayed more by "Bowling for Columbine's" $40 million worldwide gross than its left-leaning bent. Moore began researching "Fahrenheit 911" more than a year ago and intends to complete it in time for submission to Cannes 2004 and a theatrical release prior to the presidential election next November. The Bush - bin Laden ties that Moore will explore include George Bush Sr.'s business dealings with Mohammed bin Laden, the Saudi construction magnate who left $300 million to his son, Osama and the connection between the Bush Sr. led CIA and the forces in Afghanistan that fought the Soviet Union in the late 70s and early 80s. In his Variety interview, Moore attributed the "Fahrenheit" deal and increased sales of his book "Stupid White Men" since his Oscar speech to public support for his politics. "It's because the majority of Americans agree with me, see the economy in the toilet, and didn't vote for George W. People are now realizing that you can question your government while still caring about the soldiers." From refertofriend at reply.yahoo.com Tue Apr 8 16:13:37 2003 From: refertofriend at reply.yahoo.com (Yahoo!News) Date: Tue Apr 8 15:12:58 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs Message-ID: <20030408221254.C621D15DC190@xent.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lair.xent.com/pipermail/fork/attachments/20030408/6bbd3672/attachment.htm From bitbitch at magnesium.net Tue Apr 8 19:26:24 2003 From: bitbitch at magnesium.net (bitbitch@magnesium.net) Date: Tue Apr 8 15:25:42 2003 Subject: Okay, that's it, I'm one step closer to ex-pat'ing! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <130522846132.20030408182624@magnesium.net> JB> I wish I worked for the AG. If I did, I would tell him "Fuck you, you JB> fucking wacko moron. Go straight to the hell you believe in, you JB> fucking nutball, I'm not singing your retarded song. You are a fucking JB> dinosaur living in a distorted, delusional, pathological, DANGEROUS JB> 'Father Knows Best' fundamentalist fantasy land." And what Jeff Forgets to mention is the very obvious aftermath. 'You're Fired.' He's an idiot Jeff. No one thinks otherwise (save for Shrubco and a few really -really- nutty fuckups in Arkansas). He tried to clothe busts because they were naked. http://www.ainews.com/story/2909/ What the hell do you expect? Its not like we can unelect him. DAmn appointment positions... *Grumble* -- Best regards, bitbitch mailto:bitbitch@magnesium.net From owen at permafrost.net Tue Apr 8 21:22:59 2003 From: owen at permafrost.net (Owen Byrne) Date: Tue Apr 8 16:23:22 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs In-Reply-To: <20030408221254.C621D15DC190@xent.com> References: <20030408221254.C621D15DC190@xent.com> Message-ID: <3E9359D3.5050305@permafrost.net> Yahoo!News wrote: > *daniel grisinger (daniel@netgods.net)* has sent you a news article. > (Email address has not been verified.) > > *Personal message:* > > this is what the peace activists were opposed to. this is what the > antiwar crowd is--a group of people demonstrating in favor of the > right of a vicious dictator to imprison children. > > how about it, guys, do you still think that these children were better > off sitting in an iraqi prison than they are free? > > /Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs/ > http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/afp/iraq_war_marines_prison > > > And this is what Al-Qaeda wants to overthrow: How can I justify not supporting them?: Owen http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510522003?open&of=ENG-USA > *USA: More double standards as another child offender set to be executed* In the same week that Secretary of State Colin Powell spoke of "the steadfast commitment of the United States to advance internationally agreed human rights principles worldwide", the USA is set to violate a fundamental principle of international law respected across the world, Amnesty International said today, as Oklahoma prepared to execute Scott Hain for a crime committed when he was 17. > > "Where will that steadfast commitment be at 6pm on Thursday evening (3 > April 2003) in Oklahoma's death chamber?" asked Amnesty International. > "As the execution team kills Scott Hain, the USA's claim to be global > human rights champion will once again be drained of credibility." > > International law prohibits the use of the death penalty against > anyone who was under 18 years old at the time of the crime. The USA is > today virtually the only country prepared to flout this principle. > > "Scott Hain is set to become the fourth child offender to be executed > in the world in the past 12 months", Amnesty International said. "All > four will have been put to death in the United States." > > Scott Hain would also become the 18th child offender reported to have > been executed worldwide in the past six years. All but five will have > been killed in the USA, whose President has repeatedly stressed its > commitment to the rule of law. > > On Monday, launching the US State Department's reports on human rights > in other countries, Secretary Powell referred to President Bush's > "solemn pledge that the United States will always stand for the > non-negotiable demands of human dignity." > > "Warehousing a child offender for 15 years, before strapping him down > and injecting him with poison - how does that uphold human dignity?", > Amnesty International asked, noting that last October four US Supreme > Court Justices described the execution of prisoners for crimes > committed when they were under 18 years old as "a relic of the past" > and a "shameful practice." > > Also in October, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights found > that by continuing this practice, the USA was violating a norm of > international law from which no country can exempt itself. It noted > that "the acceptance of this norm crosses political and ideological > boundaries", and added that violations had been roundly condemned by > the international community. Numerous resolutions and statements at > the United Nations have called for* *an end to the execution of child > offenders. > > *Background* > > The USA has put 21 child offenders to death since executions resumed > there in 1977, and another 80 prisoners await execution for crimes > committed when they were 16 or 17. Oklahoma executed Sean Sellers in > 1999 for a crime committed when he was 16. Scott Hain is currently the > only other child offender on Oklahoma's death row, where prisoners are > housed in conditions that violate international standards. Effectively > housed underground, they are confined to their concrete cells for up > to 24 hours without access to natural light or fresh air. > > Scott Hain and Robert Lambert were sentenced to death for the 1987 > murders of Michael Houghton and Laura Sanders. Although the state is > still seeking Robert Lambert's execution, he may yet be protected from > execution by last year's Supreme Court ruling that the execution of > people with mental retardation is unconstitutional. The ruling came 13 > years after the United Nations urged all countries to take that step. > > On Monday, the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board voted 5-0 to reject > clemency for Scott Hain. Amnesty International continues to appeal to > Governor Brad Henry to stop the execution, which is scheduled for 6pm > on 3 April 2003 in Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester. > > > From gbolcer at endeavors.com Tue Apr 8 19:20:49 2003 From: gbolcer at endeavors.com (Gregory Alan Bolcer) Date: Tue Apr 8 18:19:31 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free asmarinesroll into Baghdad suburbs References: <20030408221254.C621D15DC190@xent.com> <3E9359D3.5050305@permafrost.net> Message-ID: <3E937571.EB7DD84B@endeavors.com> Owen Byrne wrote: > And this is what Al-Qaeda wants to overthrow: > How can I justify not supporting them?: > > Owen > Oh please. You're projecting your own anti-beliefs onto someone elses that's only marginally related. It's easy to find a bunch of cat's eyes marbles when you're looking inside a marble jar. It's a little harder to find them when you look outside. Greg From daniel at netgods.net Tue Apr 8 20:54:27 2003 From: daniel at netgods.net (Daniel Grisinger) Date: Tue Apr 8 19:11:27 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs In-Reply-To: <3E9359D3.5050305@permafrost.net> References: <20030408221254.C621D15DC190@xent.com> <3E9359D3.5050305@permafrost.net> Message-ID: <3E937D53.8010703@netgods.net> Owen Byrne wrote: > And this is what Al-Qaeda wants to overthrow: > How can I justify not supporting them?: Oh, my. I almost don't know how to respond. How could you justify not supporting Al-Qaeda? Let me count the ways. You could be opposed to supporting the actions of people who have slaughtered thousands of civilians. You could be opposed to the idea of a global theocratic state run by a gang of fundamentalist muslims. Hell, you could just be opposed to the idea of a global theocratic state run by anyone. You could be nauseated at the notion of not teaching little girls to read. You could be driven to anger at the thought of murdering gay people for the horrific crime of being gay. You could maybe find some way to oppose the execution of people by stoning as punishment for adultery. Especially if they were under 18 when they did it. You could find your stomach turning at the thought that women are property, not to be seen by anyone other than their rightful owner. We all know that I could go on here, but what's the point. You've demonstrated beyond any possibility of refutation that your primary reason for opposing the liberation of the Iraqi people is an irrational hatred of America and everything she stands for. If 80% of us had been opposed to action in Iraq you'd undoubtedly have been screaming about how America doesn't give a shit about the poor, oppressed people of the world. How she just sits there, smug in her superpower complacency, while corporations rape the environment and her obese, television-addled populace ignore the plight of people whom can be freed by no power other than that which America wields. Arguing with you is pointless; this is religion, and you've already had your revelation. daniel From geege at barrera.org Tue Apr 8 23:07:32 2003 From: geege at barrera.org (geege) Date: Tue Apr 8 19:11:32 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free asmarinesroll into Baghdad suburbs In-Reply-To: <3E937571.EB7DD84B@endeavors.com> Message-ID: sudden acute reactionary sylogism: >this is what the antiwar crowd is--a group of people demonstrating in favor of the right of a vicious dictator to imprison children.> can't blame 'em for trying. the entire environmental movement is discredited with predigested (not to mention fast and loose) associations: environmentalist = foe of business = anti-capitalist = socialist. peace activist = anti war = anti freedom = satan. easy peasy. -----Original Message----- From: fork-bounces@xent.com [mailto:fork-bounces@xent.com]On Behalf Of Gregory Alan Bolcer Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 6:21 PM To: fork@xent.com Subject: Re: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free asmarinesroll into Baghdad suburbs Owen Byrne wrote: > And this is what Al-Qaeda wants to overthrow: > How can I justify not supporting them?: > > Owen > Oh please. You're projecting your own anti-beliefs onto someone elses that's only marginally related. It's easy to find a bunch of cat's eyes marbles when you're looking inside a marble jar. It's a little harder to find them when you look outside. Greg From tomwhore at slack.net Tue Apr 8 23:22:11 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 19:21:26 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs In-Reply-To: <3E937D53.8010703@netgods.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, Daniel Grisinger wrote: --]You could be opposed to the idea of a global theocratic --]state run by a gang of fundamentalist muslims. Hell, you --]could just be opposed to the idea of a global theocratic --]state run by anyone. Worse yet, a gang of fundamentalists who force staffersto sing patriotic war songs before meetings. --]You could be driven to anger at the thought of murdering --]gay people for the horrific crime of being gay. And leaving them to die somewhere in a field or curled up on a busy sidewalk. --]You could find your stomach turning at the thought that --]women are property, not to be seen by anyone other than --]their rightful owner. "bitch get me another cold fidy or il go all medievil on your ass" --]Arguing with you is pointless; this is religion, and you've --]already had your revelation. "I don't think I can handle She goes channel to channel Cold lookin' for that hero She watch channel zero" Ridenhour - Griffin - Shocklee - Sadler - Drayton From joe at barrera.org Tue Apr 8 20:29:02 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Tue Apr 8 19:28:23 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E93856E.1080300@barrera.org> Tom wrote: > On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, Daniel Grisinger wrote: > > --]You could be opposed to the idea of a global theocratic > Worse yet, a gang of fundamentalists who force staffersto sing patriotic > --]You could be driven to anger at the thought of murdering > And leaving them to die somewhere in a field or curled up on a busy > --]You could find your stomach turning at the thought that > "bitch get me another cold fidy or il go all medievil on your ass" > --]Arguing with you is pointless; this is religion, and you've Is there some sort of equivalence you're trying to point out here? Well, go ahead, say it out loud. Listen to how it sounds. Don't beat around the bush. So to speak. - Joe -- "He is not seeing pretty visions. He is seeing monsters. He is losing his mind and he feels it going. There is only one escape from this discomfort." "Here we go again, we're out of our meds, out of our minds, and we want in yours, let us in..." From tomwhore at slack.net Tue Apr 8 23:38:06 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 19:37:21 2003 Subject: Newspeak In-Reply-To: Message-ID: War IS Peace Freedom IS Slavery Ignorance IS Strength If you have doubts that this should be filed under S for SadButTrue watch about 3 hours of network news coverage. "Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end, we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible because there will be no words in which to express it... The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact, there will be no thought as we understand it now." GO -tomwsmf From beberg at mithral.com Tue Apr 8 22:39:25 2003 From: beberg at mithral.com (Adam L. Beberg) Date: Tue Apr 8 19:38:53 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs In-Reply-To: <3E9359D3.5050305@permafrost.net> Message-ID: Not quite on the same topic, but this reminds me of when the US allowed Soviet Jews to escape to America, the Soviets took preaty much every killer, thief, and mafia boss, gave them fake jewish papers, and sent them to the US. Now we have all the Bath(sp?) party leaders fleeing Iraq, allowed to leave by the US military, off to cause more trouble in Pakistan no doubt, along with basicly anyone in a cell being let out. War 2011 here we come, the military should have lots of surplus bombs by then. We can't even tell the civilians from the mitiary, no hope of telling polital prisoners from the killers. - Adam L. Beberg - beberg@mithral.com http://www.mithral.com/~beberg/ From joe at barrera.org Tue Apr 8 20:46:08 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Tue Apr 8 19:45:29 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E938970.80504@barrera.org> Adam L. Beberg wrote: > We can't even tell the civilians from the mitiary, no hope of > telling polital prisoners from the killers. Well, it all worked out fine in Germany, so I don't know what you're worried about. - Joe P.S. "Baath" P.S. What the hell is wrong with your spelling? Did you break nine of your fingers? From joe at barrera.org Tue Apr 8 20:47:00 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Tue Apr 8 19:46:21 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E9389A4.7040802@barrera.org> P.S. I wonder if Mithral shells would be an environmentally better substitute for DU shells? From joe at barrera.org Tue Apr 8 20:56:23 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Tue Apr 8 19:55:44 2003 Subject: Newspeak In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E938BD7.5020200@barrera.org> Speaking of speaking... What exactly is the difference between "Terror" and "Shock and Awe"? Didn't we experience "Shock and Awe" when the Twin Towers collapsed? - Joe From tomwhore at slack.net Tue Apr 8 23:57:34 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 19:56:51 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs In-Reply-To: <3E93856E.1080300@barrera.org> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, Joseph S Barrera III wrote: --]Is there some sort of equivalence you're trying to point out here? --]Well, go ahead, say it out loud. Listen to how it sounds. --]Don't beat around the bush. So to speak. --] What I am saying that what is going on over there is a crime to humanity but in large or small part this goverment we call the US has had its part in making it that way and more to the point while we are no where near the overt brutaliity that goes on every day there we are well on our way to getting thier ina generation or two. Please dont tell me that folks on fork are so short sighted as not to be able to see the brutality today in other places and see the arch of where we are heading in this country. Please dont tell me folks on fork are incapable of having scope, of seeing beyond a narrow focus of now now now. The US gov has been in thick with the hows and whys of many goverments in the world, Iraq is just one of them. We have bolstered, ousted, sanctioned and funded the situation in that for decades. Back in the 70's there was the outcry of Iranian Americans to wake us up to the crule rules of the Shah, they fellas we put in charge there. I remeber as a kid seeing people with posters and mock ups of torture devies the Shah used on the people. One image I will never forget is of a fella wrapped up with aluminum foil pretednding to be electrocuted while his wife cried as she handed out pamphletes. America was supporting this shit and hey were trying to tell us. Did we heed it? Nope. The situation got so bad the country boiled over, kicked out the shah and then grabbed americans as hostages . We funded Hussan and now we have spent over 10 years fighting, doing no fly zones and sanctions to clean up the mess. We are in the diplomatic crapper. Once we secure the place we are going to be spending years either helping the human wreckage we have either strewn or that was strewn in some part with our finding, or we will ignore the problem until the folks over there get mad enough and desperate enough to grab more airliners and drive them into the really tall buildings. Meanwhile back at the ranch we will be newspeaking the population down with Patriot Acts, putting the fear of GOD back in the schools and in the hearts of the children, watch as our workforce has less and less jobs to keep them busy and thus given them ample time to take up other hobies, like say the hobbies the folks in the Republic of the Congo have ("them smarty pants peacenicks, they need to be taught a lesson" "hey look, is that a towel head?" "looke there jimbob, that must be one of them hOmosexuals, lets see if he bleeds pink") Please open your scope. I am not equating the nows, I am sizing up the eventualities of our actions. Get it now? If not, fuck off, I dont have time for the selfcastrated. -tomwsmf From joe at barrera.org Tue Apr 8 21:01:14 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Tue Apr 8 20:00:34 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs In-Reply-To: <3E9359D3.5050305@permafrost.net> References: <20030408221254.C621D15DC190@xent.com> <3E9359D3.5050305@permafrost.net> Message-ID: <3E938CFA.1060204@barrera.org> Owen Byrne wrote: > And this is what Al-Qaeda wants to overthrow: > How can I justify not supporting them?: >> *USA: More double standards as another >> child offender set to be executed* >> [...] >> Hain for a crime committed when he was 17. Wait. Are you saying that Al-Qaeda has problems with capital punishment?? (And is a 17 year old really a "child"?) From joe at barrera.org Tue Apr 8 21:14:29 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Tue Apr 8 20:13:49 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E939015.9060006@barrera.org> Tom ranted as follows: > What I am saying that what is going on over there is a crime to humanity > but in large or small part this goverment we call the US has had its part > in making it that way and more to the point while we are no where near > the overt brutaliity that goes on every day there we are well on our way > to getting thier ina generation or two. Yes. But is it better to be consistent, or to try to fix our mess? I pick the latter. > The US gov has been in thick with the hows and whys of many goverments in > the world, Iraq is just one of them. We have bolstered, ousted, sanctioned > and funded the situation in that for decades. Back in the 70's there > was the outcry of Iranian Americans to wake us up to the crule rules of See above. > the Shah, they fellas we put in charge there. I remeber as a kid seeing > people with posters and mock ups of torture devies the Shah used on the > people. One image I will never forget is of a fella wrapped up with > aluminum foil pretednding to be electrocuted while his wife cried as > she handed out pamphletes. America was supporting this shit and hey were > trying to tell us. Did we heed it? Nope. The situation got so bad the > country boiled over, kicked out the shah and then grabbed americans as > hostages . Yes. We fucked up. Except of course there WAS a war going on, the Cold War, and now that it's over we don't have to do the sort of shit we did during the cold war. > We funded Hussan and now we have spent over 10 years fighting, doing no > fly zones and sanctions to clean up the mess. We are in the diplomatic > crapper. Once we secure the place we are going to be spending years either > helping the human wreckage we have either strewn or that was strewn in That is the plan. It's our duty as citizens to make sure we stick to that plan. > Meanwhile back at the ranch we will be newspeaking the population down > with Patriot Acts, putting the fear of GOD back in the schools and in the No argument here > hearts of the children, watch as our workforce has less and less jobs to I don't know if you can really blame the current bust on Bush. We had a hell of a bubble and it's going to take a while to ride out the burst. > keep them busy and thus given them ample time to take up other hobies, > like say the hobbies the folks in the Republic of the Congo have ("them > smarty pants peacenicks, they need to be taught a lesson" "hey look, is > that a towel head?" "looke there jimbob, that must be one of them > hOmosexuals, lets see if he bleeds pink") So you expect that we'll have an increase in hate crimes? I don't see it. > Please open your scope. I am not equating the nows, I am sizing up the > eventualities of our actions. My scope already is expanded, really honestly. > Get it now? If not, fuck off, I dont have time for the selfcastrated. I woke up this morning with a bad hangover and my penis was missing again. This happens all the time. It's detachable. - Joe From jbone at deepfile.com Tue Apr 8 23:21:01 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Tue Apr 8 20:20:27 2003 Subject: Okay, that's it, I'm one step closer to ex-pat'ing! In-Reply-To: <130522846132.20030408182624@magnesium.net> Message-ID: <4A40C5B6-6A3A-11D7-8F54-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> On Tuesday, Apr 8, 2003, at 17:26 US/Central, bitbitch@magnesium.net wrote: > > JB> I wish I worked for the AG. If I did, I would tell him "Fuck you, > you > JB> fucking wacko moron. Go straight to the hell you believe in, you > JB> fucking nutball, I'm not singing your retarded song. You are a > fucking > JB> dinosaur living in a distorted, delusional, pathological, DANGEROUS > JB> 'Father Knows Best' fundamentalist fantasy land." > > And what Jeff Forgets to mention is the very obvious aftermath. > 'You're Fired.' Heh. Actually, I didn't forget that --- I originally closed with "and then I'd get fired and wouldn't have to worry about Ashcruft anymore." But the first part was obvious, and the second part untrue, so I left it out. ;-) :-) > What the hell do you expect? Its not like we can unelect him. DAmn > appointment positions... *Grumble* I doubt we could pay him to leave, either. Now that IS fucked up! jb From jbone at deepfile.com Tue Apr 8 23:30:07 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Tue Apr 8 20:29:33 2003 Subject: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <3E938BD7.5020200@barrera.org> Message-ID: <8FD55DDA-6A3B-11D7-8F54-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> On Tuesday, Apr 8, 2003, at 21:56 US/Central, Joseph S Barrera III wrote: > Speaking of speaking... > > What exactly is the difference between > "Terror" and "Shock and Awe"? Terror is when you're a rag-tag sub-national org engaging in asymmetric military operations / hostilities. Oops, wait, strike that, Bush fucked up that perfectly workable definition --- apparently terror is when anybody does anything hostile that the U.S. disapproves of. Terror is *BAD.* Shock and Awe is when you're the U.S. and you do total overkill hostility. Shock and Awe is *GOOD.* Everything in between is just "belligerence" and "aggression." Or, if the other party has nukes, it's "a tense situation awaiting a diplomatic solution." Everything else is *TOO CONFUSING FOR GEORGE.* Haven't you been paying attention? jb From gbolcer at endeavors.com Tue Apr 8 22:14:29 2003 From: gbolcer at endeavors.com (Gregory Alan Bolcer) Date: Tue Apr 8 21:13:09 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free asmarinesroll into Baghdad suburbs References: <3E93856E.1080300@barrera.org> Message-ID: <3E939E25.D467361A@endeavors.com> Maybe I mistook Owen's (or Daniel's) email, but I think he was trying to say that there is a moral equivalency between a child in Iraq being imprisoned in an Iraqi prison for his or her parent's political beliefs and a child or teen, judged competent as an adult by people representing our justice system for purposes of determining right and wrong, who is imprisioned for the violent murder of another human because they both involve the words "prison" and "child" when describing the concepts. Greg Joseph S Barrera III wrote: > Is there some sort of equivalence you're trying to point out here? > Well, go ahead, say it out loud. Listen to how it sounds. > Don't beat around the bush. So to speak. > > - Joe > -- > "He is not seeing pretty visions. He is seeing monsters. > He is losing his mind and he feels it going. > There is only one escape from this discomfort." > > "Here we go again, we're out of our meds, > out of our minds, and we want in yours, let us in..." From gbolcer at endeavors.com Tue Apr 8 22:17:40 2003 From: gbolcer at endeavors.com (Gregory Alan Bolcer) Date: Tue Apr 8 21:16:20 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free asmarinesroll into Baghdad suburbs References: Message-ID: <3E939EE4.A45819D7@endeavors.com> No, no. That was Cuba, or was it Australia? Greg "Adam L. Beberg" wrote: > > Not quite on the same topic, but this reminds me of when the US allowed > Soviet Jews to escape to America, the Soviets took preaty much every > killer, thief, and mafia boss, gave them fake jewish papers, and sent them > to the US. > From jm at jmason.org Tue Apr 8 22:31:38 2003 From: jm at jmason.org (Justin Mason) Date: Tue Apr 8 21:32:13 2003 Subject: Congressman defends bill to require CDMA in Iraq In-Reply-To: Message from geege <200303281936.LAA11520@stories2.idg.net> Message-ID: <20030409043144.0E14B8BBF1@localhost.jmason.org> > A U.S. representative from California defended his call for U.S. agencies reb > uilding Iraq after the current war to use Code Division Multiple Access inste > ad of a popular mobile technology used in the Middle East. "used in the Middle East"? Duh -- and Europe, Australia, SE Asia, in fact most of the rest of the world, as far as I know. Plus there's the fact that the existing infrastructure (or what's left of it) in Iraq would be running GSM. Yeesh. Are IDG really that clueless? --j. From joe at barrera.org Tue Apr 8 22:51:08 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Tue Apr 8 21:50:28 2003 Subject: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <8FD55DDA-6A3B-11D7-8F54-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> References: <8FD55DDA-6A3B-11D7-8F54-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Message-ID: <3E93A6BC.50607@barrera.org> Jeff Bone wrote: > Haven't you been paying attention? Yes, I have. That's why I'm so goddamned confused. jb From geege at barrera.org Wed Apr 9 02:19:02 2003 From: geege at barrera.org (geege) Date: Tue Apr 8 22:18:17 2003 Subject: Congressman defends bill to require CDMA in Iraq In-Reply-To: <20030409043144.0E14B8BBF1@localhost.jmason.org> Message-ID: the middle east is the relevant user here. point being there's no rationale for using cdma in the middle east. you just bolstered that point. -----Original Message----- From: fork-bounces@xent.com [mailto:fork-bounces@xent.com]On Behalf Of Justin Mason Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 9:32 PM To: fork@xent.com Subject: Re: Congressman defends bill to require CDMA in Iraq > A U.S. representative from California defended his call for U.S. agencies reb > uilding Iraq after the current war to use Code Division Multiple Access inste > ad of a popular mobile technology used in the Middle East. "used in the Middle East"? Duh -- and Europe, Australia, SE Asia, in fact most of the rest of the world, as far as I know. Plus there's the fact that the existing infrastructure (or what's left of it) in Iraq would be running GSM. Yeesh. Are IDG really that clueless? --j. From tomwhore at slack.net Wed Apr 9 03:33:55 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Tue Apr 8 23:33:18 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs In-Reply-To: <3E939015.9060006@barrera.org> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, Joseph S Barrera III wrote: --]I woke up this morning with a bad hangover and my penis was --]missing again. This happens all the time. It's detachable. --] Man i miss King Missle. Once, during a vox meet if I am not mistaken, we got so freaking drunk(theres a stretch) and did the search for the Detachable Penis) IMage the surprise onthe folks at the Kiev when we started yelling for a plate of kashkaBarnies and a penis.Smooches to you for the reffernce...and in case it has not been forked yet..... "Detatchable Penis, by King Missile I woke up this morning with a bad hangover And my penis was missing again. This happens all the time. It's detachable. [background singing begins: "detachable penis" over and over] This comes in handy a lot of the time. I can leave it home, when I think it's gonna get me in trouble, or I can rent it out, when I don't need it. But now and then I go to a party, get drunk, and the next morning I can't for the life of me remember what I did with it. First I looked around my apartment, and I couldn't find it. So I called up the place where the party was, they hadn't seen it either. I asked them to check the medicine cabinet 'cause for some reason I leave it there sometimes But not this time. So I told them if it pops up to let me know. I called a few people who were at the party, but they were no help either. I was starting to get desperate. I really don't like being without my penis for too long. It makes me feel like less of a man, and I really hate having to sit down every time I take a leak. After a few hours of searching the house, and calling everyone I could think of, I was starting to get very depressed, so I went to the Kiev, and ate breakfast. Then, as I walked down Second Avenue towards St. Mark's Place, where all those people sell used books and other junk on the street, I saw my penis lying on a blanket next to a broken toaster oven. Some guy was selling it. I had to buy it off him. He wanted twenty-two bucks, but I talked him down to seventeen. I took it home, washed it off, and put it back on. I was happy again. Complete. People sometimes tell me I should get it permanently attached, but I don't know. Even though sometimes it's a pain in the ass, I like having a detachable penis. [background voices continue to sing "detachable penis" for a while, then out]" King Missle From beberg at mithral.com Wed Apr 9 04:13:03 2003 From: beberg at mithral.com (Adam L. Beberg) Date: Wed Apr 9 01:12:30 2003 Subject: Yahoo! News Story - Jailed Iraqi children run free as marines roll into Baghdad suburbs In-Reply-To: <3E9389A4.7040802@barrera.org> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, Joseph S Barrera III wrote: > P.S. I wonder if Mithral shells would be an environmentally > better substitute for DU shells? I use /bin/tcsh on my server, which is 100% environmentally friendly - the shell that is, the server uses too much juice. - Adam L. Beberg - beberg@mithral.com http://www.mithral.com/~beberg/ From jbone at deepfile.com Wed Apr 9 10:45:30 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 07:44:56 2003 Subject: Fwd: Majority Leader Tom Delay Supports the FairTax! Message-ID: Now, I think that Tom DeLay is a nasty, nasty piece of work, but... this is a good thing. Despite the fact that we demonstrated that FairTax was not in fact a "fair tax" back here on this list over a year ago, it's still much better than the unconstitutional and wildly inefficient system that we have now. It's *fairer* than what we've got now --- i.e., it impacts your ability to accumulate wealth at a rate more closely proportional to increases in income. It "distorts" the economy less; it allows a more direct correlation between income and utility, where the current system is punitive on middle and upper-middle income earners --- the largest "wealth-creating" constituency in this country. Yet it retains some of the precious "progressiveness" of the current system. Summary in case you aren't aware of this system: * It eliminates all federal income and withholding taxes permanently * It institutes a federal sales tax at about a 23% rate * It provides rebates on basic necessity spending up to the poverty level * It is *VOLUNTARY.* You decide when you buy, you decide when you're taxed * It is sufficient for providing all federal revenue needs, including Social Security Thumbnail sketch: http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/smart/sketch.html The bill itself: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query --- type in H.R. 25 and search (weird non-use of URI?) jb Begin forwarded message: > From: "FairTax" > Date: Wed Apr 9, 2003 00:44:57 US/Central > To: > Subject: Majority Leader Tom Delay Supports the FairTax! > Reply-To: info@fairtaxvolunteer.org > > Dear FairTax Supporters, > > House Majority Leader Tom DeLay has recently co-sponsored the FairTax. > > Wow! It is the biggest win we have had in the last few years!! It is > great news since we anticipate more and more members will "follow his > lead" to co-sponsor the FairTax bill. > > Congratulations to the nationwide volunteers who have worked with > Congressman Linder, Congressman Peterson and the co- sponsors on this > issue. You proved grassroots pressure can succeed. > > Has your Congressman signed the bill yet? Read further to find out. > > To capitalize on the momentum generated by these new co-sponsors, it > is crucial that we receive your financial support to assist us to > deliver materials to the volunteers, more Congressional members and > the media. If you are not already a sustaining member, please take the > opportunity to become one now. Your help will make the difference! > Support us today for as little as $5 a month! > > http://secure.fairtaxvolunteer. org/contribute/sustain.html > > If you are unable to become a monthly contributor at this time, you > may make a one time or receive FairTax membership packages here: > > http://secure.fairtaxvolunteer .org/contribute/members.lasso > > Please take a moment to thank all of our sponsors and co-sponsors (fax > is preferable) for supporting the FairTax Act of 2003! > > Spread the word to others, especially those who have told you that the > FairTax would "never happen." We have begun to prove that it will! > > Current sponsors and co-sponsors since January 2003: > > Rep. John Linder - 1/7/2003 [GA-7] > 202-225-4272 > 202-225-4696 Fax > http://linder.house.gov/index.cf m?FuseAction=Contact.Home > > Rep. Collin C. Peterson - 1/7/2003 [MN-7] > 202-225-2165 > 202-225-1593 Fax > http://collinpeterson.house.gov//email.htm > > Rep. Max Burns - 03/31/03 [GA-12] NEW! > 202-225-2823 > 202-225-3377 Fax > http://www.house.gov/burns > > Rep. John Carter - 03/31/03 [TX-31] NEW! > 202-225-3864 > 202-225-5886 Fax > http://www.house.gov/writerep > > Rep. Phil Gingrey - 03/31/03 [GA-11] NEW! > 202-225-2931 > 202-225-2944 Fax > mailto:gingrey.ga@mail.house.gov > > Rep. John B. Shadegg - 03/31/03 [AZ - 3] NEW! > 202-225-4576 > 202-225-6328 Fax > http://johnshadegg.house.gov > > Rep. Tom DeLay - 3/26/2003 [TX-22] NEW! > 202-225-5951 > 202-225-5241 Fax > http://www.house.gov/writerep/ > > Rep. Richard H. Baker - 3/26/2003 [LA-6] NEW! > 202-225-3901 > 202-225-7313 fax (Please fax if possible) > http://www.house.gov/writerep/ > > Rep. Kevin Brady - 3/18/2003 [TX-8] NEW! > 202-225-2571 > 202-225-4381 Fax > mailto:rep.brady@mail.house.gov > > Rep. Mac Collins - 2/25/2003 [GA-8] NEW! > 202-225-5901 > 202-225-2515 Fax > http://www.house.gov/maccollins > > Rep. John Culberson - 2/25/2003 [TX-7] NEW! > 202-225-2571 > 202-225-4381 Fax > http://www.culberson.house.gov > > Rep. Nathan Deal - 3/17/2003 [GA-10] NEW! > 202-225-5211 > 202-225-8272 Fax > http://www.house.gov/deal/contact/default. shtml > > Rep. John T. Doolittle - 3/25/2003 [CA-4] NEW! > 202-225-2511 > 202-225-5444 Fax > http://www.house.gov/doolittle/email_ doolittle1.html > > Rep. Jeff Flake - 2/25/2003 [AZ-6] NEW! > 202-225-2635 > 202-226-4386 Fax > http://www.house.gov/flake > > Rep. Gil Gutknecht - 3/26/2003 [MN-1] NEW! > 202-225-2472 > 202-225-3246 Fax > mailto:gil@mail.house.gov > > Rep. Ralph M. Hall - 2/25/2003 [TX-4] > 202-225-6673 > 202-225-3332 Fax > http://www.house.gov/ralphhall > > Rep. Steve King - 2/25/2003 [IA-5] NEW! > 202-225-4426 > 202-225-3193 Fax > mailto:steve.king@mail.house.gov > > Rep. Charlie Norwood - 3/17/2003 [GA-9] NEW! > 202-225-4101 > 202-226-0776 Fax > mailto:rep.charlie.norwood@mail.house.gov > > Rep. Stevan Pearce - 3/25/2003 [NM-2] NEW! > 202-225-2365 > 202-225-9599 Fax > http://www.house.gov/pearce/contact.shtml > > > > Thank you! > Carrie K. Ardelean > Executive Director > Americans for Fair Taxation > > > > > You received this e-mail because you joined our list through our > online registration, e-mail newsletter, petition, direct mail effort > or phone bank. If you do NOT wish to receive e-mail updates about the > FairTax, please pardon our e-mail (and accept our apology). You may > reply to this message with the word 'remove' in the subject line from > your original registration e-mail address to be removed from our > e-mail list. > > Contributions to Americans for Fair Taxation are not tax deductible > because we lobby for you in Washington, D.C. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 7430 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lair.xent.com/pipermail/fork/attachments/20030409/12727982/attachment.bin From deafbox at hotmail.com Wed Apr 9 15:52:01 2003 From: deafbox at hotmail.com (Russell Turpin) Date: Wed Apr 9 07:51:21 2003 Subject: Okay, that's it, I'm one step closer to ex-pat'ing! Message-ID: JB: >>I wish I worked for the AG. .. Bitbitch: >And what Jeff Forgets to mention is the very obvious aftermath. 'You're >Fired.' I'm happy to temporarily suspend my disbelief for all sorts of fictions fantastic, from vampires gothic to futures singularious. But can either of you explain any remotely imaginable scenario whereby Ashcroft hires Jeff in the first place?!? _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From jbone at deepfile.com Wed Apr 9 11:03:31 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 08:02:59 2003 Subject: Okay, that's it, I'm one step closer to ex-pat'ing! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <6DAF8636-6A9C-11D7-8F54-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> On Wednesday, Apr 9, 2003, at 09:52 US/Central, Russell Turpin wrote: > But > can either of you explain any remotely > imaginable scenario whereby Ashcroft hires > Jeff in the first place?!? The idea of Ashcruft hiring me is only slightly less plausible than the idea that I would apply for such employment in the first place or accept such if offered. ;-) jb From sati_home at yahoo.com Wed Apr 9 09:11:39 2003 From: sati_home at yahoo.com (sateesh narahari) Date: Wed Apr 9 08:10:57 2003 Subject: time to short HP ? Message-ID: <20030409151139.23963.qmail@web14005.mail.yahoo.com> Look at this picture: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030409/161/3qx66.html And there were sanctions on literally everything, how did Compaq computers endup there?. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com From deafbox at hotmail.com Wed Apr 9 16:30:48 2003 From: deafbox at hotmail.com (Russell Turpin) Date: Wed Apr 9 08:30:04 2003 Subject: [BITS] Patriot II's attack on citizenship Message-ID: http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/03/06/findlaw.analysis.mariner.patriotII/index.html _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus From tomwhore at slack.net Wed Apr 9 13:16:49 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Wed Apr 9 09:16:04 2003 Subject: Okay, that's it, I'm one step closer to ex-pat'ing! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Apr 2003, Russell Turpin wrote: --]imaginable scenario whereby Ashcroft hires --]Jeff in the first place?!? --] Maybe not hire directly, but if he worked as a contractor in the right office it is possible. The gov is definelty on a push to contract out lots of work and thus a vector for the JB JA meeting of the minds, ok well the meeting of one mind and an empty shell of evil. So jeff, do some 411 on JA's office and see what contracting firm they are using to fill in the workforce. -tomwsmf From jbone at deepfile.com Wed Apr 9 12:23:31 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 09:22:54 2003 Subject: Okay, that's it, I'm one step closer to ex-pat'ing! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9A3DBCE6-6AA7-11D7-8F54-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> On Wednesday, Apr 9, 2003, at 11:16 US/Central, Tom wrote: > So jeff, do some 411 on JA's office and see what contracting firm they > are > using to fill in the workforce. Sorry Tom, I'm gainfully employed at the moment. ;-) Happily, no time to investigate how to insinuate myself into Asscrap's org just to tell him to piss off. :-) jb From bill at wstoddard.com Wed Apr 9 13:23:39 2003 From: bill at wstoddard.com (Bill Stoddard) Date: Wed Apr 9 09:23:12 2003 Subject: [BITS] Patriot II's attack on citizenship In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E94490B.9040600@wstoddard.com> Russell Turpin wrote: > > http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/03/06/findlaw.analysis.mariner.patriotII/index.html > The last three paragraphs of this article, IMHO, gets right to the point . This is the reason for PII. PII seems to be a classic case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. B From dl at silcom.com Wed Apr 9 10:52:43 2003 From: dl at silcom.com (Dave Long) Date: Wed Apr 9 09:46:13 2003 Subject: Calculation, Combinators, Cable Coiling Message-ID: <200304091652.JAA30780@maltesecat> Calculation, Combinators, Cable Coiling (plus chirality, coffee cups and quanta) ---------------------------------------- For the first few thousand years, counting was a relatively primitive business, which consisted largely of shuffling tokens and following simple formal rules to complete a computation. [0] The abacus was an advance on the counting board, in that it fixed the digit schema, but although it served as a good database to store intermediate results, the digits had independent representations, and the logic to run a computation still needed an intermediate layer of "business rules" in the heads of those sliding the beads. The Pascaline advanced on the abacus, by figuring out how to couple the beads. If one has two wheels, both marked (0-9), it is possible to add them together to count up to 10+10=20. In proper combination [1] it is possible to multiply them to count up to 10*10=100, and the Pascaline[2] had both several dials and carry propagation. In a way, coupling units and tens with a carry bit is similar to twisting a loop to form a Moebius strip: when untangled, there are two independent wheels, like the normal loop of two sides; after entangling, there is one long virtual wheel, like the Moebius strip with only one single side. Maybe it would be possible to use a log scale [3] with a Moebius loop so that it could also multiply, but normally these are just additive loops: they turn what used to be two edges of length 2pi each into a single edge of length 4pi. Loops of length 4pi are not without their uses; they allow us to: - coil a cable so it uncoils nicely - rotate a full coffee cup completely (without letting go or spilling) - leave a fermion in the same state in which we found it and so, sometime soon maybe we'll advance on the Pascaline, by shuffling entangled states through simple formal operators to complete a computation. -Dave :: :: :: [0] Do not believe that the Romans used to calculate with Roman numerals. Sure, they gave lists of figures in that format to their computers, and expected answers back in the same format, but the servers would have calculated in decimal, with a conversion for input and output. If you find this odd, consider how we give lists of figures in decimal to our computers, and expect answers back in that format, but the calculations are done in binary, with a conversion for input and output. [1] BijSO, not TBijSO? [2] invented by Blaise Pascal in 1642. In our day, information processing is so advanced that a government collects taxes centrally, and uses part of the proceeds to pay dividends (and return capital) to people who have advanced it money. In Pascal's fathers' day, the relationship was inverted: someone would advance the government money, and (as he was better informed of his neighbors' situations than a bureaucrat would be) would then get the privilege of collecting taxes due (plus a bit for a dividend stream) in his local area. Of course, Pascal's father not only had to collect taxes to recoup his investment, but he had to do so in 20's and 12's as well as 10's, so those digits had their own wheels. [3] courtesy Napier, 1614 From jbone at deepfile.com Wed Apr 9 13:02:48 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 10:02:05 2003 Subject: [STORK] A fascinating revision control system Message-ID: <17217951-6AAD-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> What? Jbone posting tech bits? Preposterous! Unheard of! Ummm... onwards. Check this out, it hit sweetcode [1] this morning. (If you're not familiar with sweetcode, think of it as a kind of low-volume, high-quality freshmeat. Fascinating stuff, usually.) Today, they posted about darc. [2] It's Yet Another Revision System, but this one's pretty interesting. It's written in Haskell (huge plus or huge minus, depending on your POV) and uses some pretty advanced concepts. Haven't looked at the code, yet --- Haskell can be beautiful and literate or nigh unreadable, depending. Code written by physicists tends toward the latter, IME. ;-) From the blurb: "Darcs is yet another revision control system, but its "theory of patches" ("I have looked at patches as being analogous to the operators of quantum mechanics," says the author, a physicist) makes it at once much simpler and significantly more capable than most other such systems. See also monotone [3] (submitted by Darius Bacon), a crypto-centric, decentralized version control system which uses NNTP as a transport." Fun stuff. Now, if they'd just push this idea to the logical conclusion: integrated, implicit versioning in the filesystem couple with directory-based filesystem indirection and HTTP access generating and fed by RSS... ;-) Fyi, jb [1] http://www.sweetcode.org/ [2] http://abridgegame.org/darcs/ [3] http://www.venge.net/monotone/ From jamesr at best.com Wed Apr 9 11:15:48 2003 From: jamesr at best.com (James Rogers) Date: Wed Apr 9 10:15:08 2003 Subject: Congressman defends bill to require CDMA in Iraq In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <003a01c2febb$aa9f20d0$f200000a@avalon> > the middle east is the relevant user here. point being > there's no rationale for using cdma in the middle east. I see it as a mixed bag. 1) It is very blatant lobbying by Qualcomm. 2) It is unclear to what extent Iraq already has infrastructure and what the state of that infrastructure is. HOWEVER 3) If you are going to build a wireless telecom infrastructure, CDMA in its various forms is a substantially better technology than GSM. Depending on the current state of the existing infrastructure, it may very well be advisable to make the investment in CDMA-based systems. GSM is a dominant technology because it was standardized by fiat early on, and was selected in part in Europe because it was a European technology rather than an American technology (with all the patents and related money issues). In the US the protocols and technologies had to battle it out in the marketplace, where GSM lost. GSM is slowly but surely on its way out, and I don't see any reason to saddle Iraq with an aging telecom technology unnecessarily. Cheers, -James Rogers jamesr@best.com From jbone at deepfile.com Wed Apr 9 13:30:41 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 10:29:58 2003 Subject: [SPORK] Baghdad falls, time for new jingo Message-ID: Time to become familiar with the phrase "pockets of resistance." http://www.salon.com/news/2003/04/09/celebrate/index.html Hopefully we'll do a better job of nation-building here than we did in Afghanistan... OTOH, why would we, we need the Third World to make ourselves feel superior. :-/ jb From tomwhore at slack.net Wed Apr 9 14:37:24 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Wed Apr 9 10:36:39 2003 Subject: [SPORK] Baghdad falls, time for new jingo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Apr 2003, Jeff Bone wrote: --] --]Time to become familiar with the phrase "pockets of resistance." --] --] http://www.salon.com/news/2003/04/09/celebrate/index.html --] --]Hopefully we'll do a better job of nation-building here than we did in --]Afghanistan... OTOH, why would we, we need the Third World to make --]ourselves feel superior. :-/ Also, we need the next gen and current gen of pissed off people to become the Terrorist needed to make the Patriot acts go down the throats of americans easier Of course the new Patriot acts have a nice little section that would simply make any American who opposes it a Terrorist, but that would cause all sorts of messy problems if used too often, so might as well just keep the Middle East as our incubater for Terrorism. Its been working OK so far. Your tax dollars at work, Let us now all hold hands and sing the lattest Ashcroft hymn. -tomwsmf From deafbox at hotmail.com Wed Apr 9 18:44:44 2003 From: deafbox at hotmail.com (Russell Turpin) Date: Wed Apr 9 10:44:03 2003 Subject: [STORK] A fascinating revision control system Message-ID: >"I have looked at patches as being analogous to the operators of quantum >mechanics," says the author, a physicist For some reason, I have this vision of a code submission form that requires me to list the previous revisions with which the current one commutes. _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus From tomwhore at slack.net Wed Apr 9 14:51:04 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Wed Apr 9 10:50:19 2003 Subject: Rotisserie Message-ID: Following JB's sweetcode link this item hit me upside the head as something Fork would either Love or Hate ""The Rotisserie is a structured online discussion system that provides an alternative to the traditional threaded-messaging model of most online discussions. It breaks discussions into synchronous rounds, slowing down the pace of the discussions, and controls who responds to whom, democratizing the discussions and making it very likely that someone will respond to every participant." http://h2oproject.law.harvard.edu/rotisserie Rotisserie The Rotisserie implements an innovative approach to online discussion that encourages measured, thoughtful discourse in a way that traditional threaded messaging systems cannot. In contrast to the completely asynchronous, broadcast-to-broadcast mode of existing threaded messaging systems, the Rotisserie adds structure to both the timing and the flow of the discussion. The timing of the discussion is broken into semi-synchronous rounds. Users are allowed to post responses at any time, but their responses are not published to other users until the deadline for the current round passes. This structure allows users to put significant thought into their responses rather than competing with other participants to post first. More important, this structure allows the system to control the flow of the discussion by distributing responses to specific users for further discussion at the end of each round, ensuring that every post is distributed to at least one other user for comment and that each user has exactly one post to which to respond. Lastly, the Rotisserie system includes support for discussion not only within a given class, but also between many different classes at once, allowing, for instance, Internet law classes at HLS and Cambridge to participate in a discussion about digital rights management with an engineering course at MIT. -tomwsmf From tomwhore at slack.net Wed Apr 9 14:58:26 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Wed Apr 9 10:57:39 2003 Subject: [STORK] nntp//rss Message-ID: Now this is just about as neat a thing as I have seen in the last 38 hours. ---------------------- nntp//rss is a Java-based bridge between RSS feeds and NNTP clients, enabling you to read your favorite RSS syndicated content within your existing NNTP newsreader. RSS feeds are represented as NNTP newsgroups, providing a simple, straightforward and familiar environment for news reading. nntp//rss contains both an NNTP server and an RSS aggregator, with a web interface for administration and monitoring. Installation is as simple as unpacking the distribution and running the application. It has been tested against popular NNTP newsreaders, including Mozilla, Outlook Express, MT-NewsWatcher, Free Agent, and text-based readers such as Gnus, tin and nn. Posting - You can now post entries to your blog from within your newsreader. nntp//rss has support for the popular Blogger, LiveJournal and MetaWeblog APIs. http://www.methodize.org/nntprss From jbone at deepfile.com Wed Apr 9 14:01:18 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 11:00:40 2003 Subject: [SPORK] I'd love to see... Message-ID: <43B6C8E8-6AB5-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> John Ashcroft perform on American Idol. Oh, what I wouldn't give... ---- Seacrest: Let's see what our judges say... Randy: Yo, John, dog, what was you thinkin'? Uh, that was, man, like, I didn't dig it at all. Your song choice, was, well, what the hell song was that? You wrote that, dog? Don't quit your day job, bro. I didn't dig it at all... Paula: Well, John. Nice suit. You definitely made that song your own. I'm mean, it wasn't very good, but you definitely got up there and did your thing. I wasn't really thrilled by the song, I thought it was kind of, you know, corny, but... good job, I guess. Didn't really do it for me, though. Simon: [looks at Paula, Randy] You Americans are, are, are --- fucking smoking crack, I swear it! You're letting this moron off that easily? [looks at Ashcroft] DREADFUL! DISASTROUS! A COMPLETE TRAIN WRECK! That was one of the worst songs I've ever heard, and one of the worst performances I've ever heard! My god, I couldn't wait for it to be over! If it had gone on thirty seconds more, I might've had to commit suicide! Seriously, I was looking around for sharp implements to shove into my brain pan! Who told you you could write songs? And what in HELL are you doing singing? You sound like a zombie, and the song itself was just, well, there aren't words for how bad that was! My god, even Leonard Nimoy is a better singer than you are, and he's abysmal! The only positive thing I can say about the whole package is that you aren't the worst singer in the world: we found that guy earlier this season, the "Like a Virgin" guy. You're not that bad, but --- second worst singer in the world, one of the worst songwriters. I've got two words for you: PATHETIC LOSER. Sorry. Don't quit your day job. Seacrest: [to Ashcroft] So John, the judges were pretty harsh. How did you feel about your performance? Ashcroft: Well, Ryan, I just did my best. That song is about America, God's own country. That song IS America. I just got up there and, you know... The spirit of Jesus Christ just entered my soul and sang through me, so if people don't vote for me, well, then they're just anti-American Satanists or something. But I'll prevail --- the forces of Christian goodness and light and Ralph Reed will make their voices heard. I mean, who wouldn't vote for Jesus Christ? Seacrest: [sotto voce] Fucking nutball... [looks at camera] Tell us what you think, America. If you'd like to vote for John Ashcroft, call us at 1866436570x.... --- jb From jamesr at best.com Wed Apr 9 12:02:58 2003 From: jamesr at best.com (James Rogers) Date: Wed Apr 9 11:02:36 2003 Subject: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <3E938BD7.5020200@barrera.org> Message-ID: <004001c2fec2$4752e280$f200000a@avalon> From: Joseph S Barrera III > What exactly is the difference between > "Terror" and "Shock and Awe"? It is unfortunate that the talking heads latched on to the term "Shock and Awe" and that the DoD politicians used it. The term comes from a paper published a number of years ago on maximizing the psychological component of offensive combat operations. I saw an interview with one of the authors of the paper who said he wished they had used another term in the paper because it sounds absurd in the context it is currently being used in the popular media. Despite the term, it does not imply grossly visual Hollywood-style combat scenarios. The difference between "terror" and "shock and awe" is somewhat subtle. "Shock and Awe" is a mindfuck where the enemy combatant feels utterly overwhelmed BUT they do not feel cornered or see the obvious inevitability of their own death. The trick is to create a battlefield environment where most of the enemy combatants feel that they have the reasonable option of escaping the overwhelming wave of destruction. In short, you attempt to trigger the strongest fight-or-flight response possible, and you do so in a combat environment intentionally biased to make flight an attractive and reasonable option, thereby minimizing the amount of actual "fight" that the enemy soldiers decide to give. "Terror" is designed to engender fear that is disproportionate to the threat. It is not generally intended to bias the fight-or-flight response on the battlefield in any particularly manner, and historically has been an unreliable tool on the battlefield and arguably counter-productive. > Didn't we experience "Shock and Awe" > when the Twin Towers collapsed? Technically, no. The closest attempted analog in American history would be Pearl Harbor. Cheers, -James Rogers jamesr@best.com From gbolcer at endeavors.com Wed Apr 9 14:31:26 2003 From: gbolcer at endeavors.com (Gregory Alan Bolcer) Date: Wed Apr 9 13:33:25 2003 Subject: Newspeak References: <004001c2fec2$4752e280$f200000a@avalon> Message-ID: <3E94831E.6030905@endeavors.com> I think the whole point everyone misses about shock and awe is that it's not supposed to be an overwhelming wave of destruction, but hitting the absolute worst possible target at the worst possible time to inflict at much mindf as possible. I think it all goes back to the efficiency versus effectiveness arguement. Terror is effective, shock & awe is efficient. Greg James Rogers wrote: > From: Joseph S Barrera III > >>What exactly is the difference between >>"Terror" and "Shock and Awe"? > > > > It is unfortunate that the talking heads latched on to the term "Shock and > Awe" and that the DoD politicians used it. The term comes from a paper > published a number of years ago on maximizing the psychological component of > offensive combat operations. I saw an interview with one of the authors of > the paper who said he wished they had used another term in the paper because > it sounds absurd in the context it is currently being used in the popular > media. Despite the term, it does not imply grossly visual Hollywood-style > combat scenarios. > > The difference between "terror" and "shock and awe" is somewhat subtle. > "Shock and Awe" is a mindfuck where the enemy combatant feels utterly > overwhelmed BUT they do not feel cornered or see the obvious inevitability > of their own death. The trick is to create a battlefield environment where > most of the enemy combatants feel that they have the reasonable option of > escaping the overwhelming wave of destruction. In short, you attempt to > trigger the strongest fight-or-flight response possible, and you do so in a > combat environment intentionally biased to make flight an attractive and > reasonable option, thereby minimizing the amount of actual "fight" that the > enemy soldiers decide to give. > > "Terror" is designed to engender fear that is disproportionate to the > threat. It is not generally intended to bias the fight-or-flight response > on the battlefield in any particularly manner, and historically has been an > unreliable tool on the battlefield and arguably counter-productive. > > > >>Didn't we experience "Shock and Awe" >>when the Twin Towers collapsed? > > > > Technically, no. The closest attempted analog in American history would be > Pearl Harbor. > > Cheers, > > -James Rogers > jamesr@best.com > > -- Gregory Alan Bolcer, CTO | work: +1.949.833.2800 gbolcer at endeavors.com | http://endeavors.com Endeavors Technology, Inc.| cell: +1.714.928.5476 From jbone at deepfile.com Wed Apr 9 16:46:22 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 13:46:00 2003 Subject: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <3E94831E.6030905@endeavors.com> Message-ID: <52AF6C78-6ACC-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> On Wednesday, Apr 9, 2003, at 15:31 US/Central, Gregory Alan Bolcer wrote: > I think it all goes back to the > efficiency versus effectiveness arguement. > Terror is effective, shock & awe is efficient. Don't you have that backwards? I'm not sure how you could consider dumping $1B worth of high-tech ordinance on somebody "efficient" by any definition, regardless of effect, particularly when compared to a small number of guys armed only with box cutters taking down America for most of a week. I'm sorry, but dropping the Twin Towers was "shocking" and "awesome." Taking out a few leadership targets with some high-tech destructo-gadgetry amidst tank-plinking as usual, not so much. (OB_FACT: less than 7% of the precision-guided bombs dropped so far has been dropped on leadership targets; the bulk has been taking out Iraqi armor and infantry divisions. Source: Rush Limbaugh, Monday 4/7. Know thy enemy.) But then, I'm also very confused about the tendency to refer to those guys with box cutters and suicide bombers as "cowards" while we refer to the guys that load launch tubes on boats 200m out at sea or drop bombs from above-AA altitudes "courageous." Newspeak: it's opposite day. Problem: it obscures understanding of the situation --- but then, that's by design. jb From tomwhore at slack.net Wed Apr 9 17:52:33 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Wed Apr 9 13:52:25 2003 Subject: How to make me a customer Message-ID: Tom Peters would love this....I saw the blurb about aduioblogs free trial up on Blogger today. I finlay decided to take them up on the free offer and make an entry to my fave team run blog, Pleasant. So I click through, sign up for the free trail(enter your phone number, a blog to post your audio bits to, a pin, an email, done) and then placed a phone call to do my studly in the field reporter blog entry. Easy as pie excpet for one thing, it did not show up in Pleasant. So I post a text entry to them, via nntp//rss of course, just to make sure its not the blogger servers or some such. I try againwith the dial, push, speak and go ...still nothing. So i think, heck maybe its me, maybe its an overload on thier end...maybe its the weather..fast forward to about an hour latter....ring ring...my work phone is ringing. It is a tech from Audioblog. Stunned me, then happy me. These folks are so on thier biz that they get ahold of me fromthe info I entered and wanted me to know they are working on my problem...me...a lowley free trial user account and they bust a hump to get ahold of me to set my mind at rest. Man thats a pursuit of exclence. Then the tech and I get to talking and we quickly realize we both know some tech and hone in on a possible solution, that being I am posting to a team blog that is owned by someone else other than me but to which I have posting rights. Thinking about it the tech realizes some more of the open issues he is working on have that same situation. He lets me know he is going to go hammer out some sort of fix and get ahold of me when they have it fixed.Have a nice day. Amazing. http://www.audioblogger.com/ http://www.blogger.com/ http://www.pleasant.blogspot.com/ http://www.methodize.org/nntprss From gbolcer at endeavors.com Wed Apr 9 15:37:25 2003 From: gbolcer at endeavors.com (Gregory Alan Bolcer) Date: Wed Apr 9 14:39:27 2003 Subject: Newspeak References: <52AF6C78-6ACC-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Message-ID: <3E949295.6090608@endeavors.com> Jeff, Efficiency is the relation of output to input. Effectiveness is the total output. You missed the point which was that the CONCEPT of "shock and awe" is like acupuncture. Mininalist input effect to maximum output effect. Thus, the thread was that the term has been misapplied. Are you saying taking out a building is the same as taking out hundreds of buildings, social organizations, real or perceived threats, and military weaponry? Greg Jeff Bone wrote: > Don't you have that backwards? I'm not sure how you could consider > dumping $1B worth of high-tech ordinance on somebody "efficient" by any > definition, regardless of effect, particularly when compared to a small > number of guys armed only with box cutters taking down America for most > of a week. I'm sorry, but dropping the Twin Towers was "shocking" and > "awesome." Taking out a few leadership targets with some high-tech > destructo-gadgetry amidst tank-plinking as usual, not so much. > (OB_FACT: less than 7% of the precision-guided bombs dropped so far has > been dropped on leadership targets; the bulk has been taking out Iraqi > armor and infantry divisions. Source: Rush Limbaugh, Monday 4/7. Know > thy enemy. > > But then, I'm also very confused about the tendency to refer to those > guys with box cutters and suicide bombers as "cowards" while we refer to > the guys that load launch tubes on boats 200m out at sea or drop bombs > from above-AA altitudes "courageous." > > Newspeak: it's opposite day. Problem: it obscures understanding of > the situation --- but then, that's by design. > > jb > > -- Gregory Alan Bolcer, CTO | work: +1.949.833.2800 gbolcer at endeavors.com | http://endeavors.com Endeavors Technology, Inc.| cell: +1.714.928.5476 From tomwhore at slack.net Wed Apr 9 18:45:11 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Wed Apr 9 14:44:52 2003 Subject: HB 2892, Oregon making sense Message-ID: Sure we also try to make protesing a terrorist offense (and thus under the patriot act could get your citzenship yanked) but we also do this... http://news.com.com/2100-1012-996210.html?tag=fd_lede2_hed ------------------------------------------------------------------ A group of open-source advocates and critics will meet behind closed doors Wednesday afternoon, in the first of at least two meetings in search of a compromise on what could be the first bill in the United States to encourage the use of open-source software by a state government. The bill, introduced by Oregon Rep. Phil Barnhart, D-Eugene, last month, would require the state to consider using open-source software when buying new programs. Although the bill does not specifically mandate open-source software over proprietary software, the bill does say it cannot be excluded from the selection process. The bill, HB 2892, also says open-source options can "significantly reduce the state's costs of obtaining and maintaining software." Although the bill is in a nascent stage, it's quickly drawn the ire of companies, including Microsoft and the Initiative for Software Choice (ISC), a group that's popped up in the wake of similar legislative efforts in other countries. Opponents of the bill say governments can already choose open-source software, and they worry that the legislation could set a dangerous precedent of a government mandating certain types of software over others. "It's classic preference legislation that isn't needed," Mike Wendy, policy counsel for the ISC, said. Similar battles over open-source software legislation are playing out across the globe as legislatures in places from Austin, Texas, to Brussels, Belgium, are considering measures that would carve out considerations for open source when a government buys new software. These days, the conflict is especially heated in Oregon, where open-source advocates are working hard to pass the bill amid anti-Microsoft feelings sparked in part by an antipiracy crackdown that targeted the state's education system. Last year, Microsoft sent letters to some Oregon schools suggesting that they pay up for new licensing agreements or risk becoming the target of software piracy audits. At a hearing last week before Oregon's House General Government Committee in Salem, supporters and critics of Barnhart's measure squared off in an effort to convince legislators to either adopt or abandon the legislation. The event was a microcosm of the larger debate over open-source legislation in governments around the world, especially as open-source advocates--who promote their software as cheaper and more flexible than proprietary versions--are starting to grab the attention of cash-crunched governments. Lined up behind the measure at last week's hearing were Linux user groups and developers, along with school district representatives, some who testified that they were able to save so much money using open-source software that they could afford to hire additional teachers. Eric Harrison, with the Multnomah Education Service District, said the district has saved $200,000 a year since it began using open-source programs. "We have found that open-source software is often the best-performing, most-reliable, least-expensive solution," he told the committee. On the other side were representatives of proprietary software makers, including the Business Software Alliance (BSA) and the ISC, who worried that legislators were being misled by claims that open-source software is free of costs. In testimony prepared for the hearing, Mario Correa, the BSA's software policy director, said the bill would place the state government "squarely in the position of picking technological winners and losers and seeking to influence technological development by fiat, rather than through market forces. We believe that such efforts would ultimately fail, and in the process, prove harmful both to the state and to those Oregonians who make their living in the high-tech industry." Now, those same supporters and opponents of the bill will conduct a series of closed-door meetings in an effort to hammer out their differences over the legislation. The committee chairman has given the working group until April 15 to come up with a compromise--a task that won't be easy, given the polarized views. "We would prefer not to see a bill," the ISC's Wendy said. "I don't know if there's some way to tone the language down. Hopefully something can be worked out." In search of fair play? Cooper Stevenson, one of the bill's main backers and a member of the Mid-Willamette Valley Linux Users Group, said the legislation isn't designed to give open-source an advantage over proprietary software, but merely to level the playing field. In the past, he said, governments were afraid to adopt open-source software because it wasn't necessarily ready for prime time in terms of user-friendliness and tech support. Now that it is, Stevenson and others want legislation that would require governments to include the software in their decision-making process--and to justify their decision if they don't. "We've been watching the proprietary software vendors a long time, and we know what they're up to," Stevenson said. "It certainly doesn't seem they're interested in saving Oregon money or in Oregonians' privacy rights." The suggestions of the working group meeting on Wednesday are not binding, meaning that the committee can incorporate some or all of them into the bill or just ignore them if it wants to. If the bill makes it out of this committee, it would then move onto a Ways and Means Committee before both houses of the state legislature would get a chance to vote on it. Proponents are hoping that a success in Oregon could ignite similar movements across the country. Right now, legislatures in Texas and Oklahoma are also considering bills with open-source code components; Rhode Island also appears poised to do so. A movement to convince California lawmakers to adopt a similar bill never gained steam, partly because it mandated choosing open-source over proprietary software. Opponents of the movement to carve out open-source protections said they're not as worried about the Texas and Oklahoma efforts, which they expect will not survive. Instead, the groups are focusing their fire on the Oregon bill and on an open-source measure pending in a regional body in Belgium. "We're concerned about the precedential value of this," the ISC's Wendy said. "Other countries and (European Union) members might look to this as a model." The ISC also is trying to shape the implementation of a presidential decree in Andalusia, Spain, which not only encourages the adoption of open-source technology in education and government centers but also urges promotion among the general population. There's one thing upon which both sides can agree when it comes to open-source legislation: There's sure to be more of it. Already, regional governments in Pakistan and Brazil have adopted software favorable to open source. And similar measures are percolating worldwide. Backers of the Oregon bill say some well-known software companies have indicated interest in their movement, but so far are not ready to go public. Watching who sides with whom could be one of the most interesting sideshows of the debate. Although the bill-bashing ISC includes tech giants Intel and Cisco among its more than 220 members, some software bigwigs are noticeably absent from the list, including Oracle and IBM. Both companies are in a tricky political position in this case, because they have embraced both open-source and proprietary software. Meanwhile, the fight is sure to heat up. Michael Tiemann--the chief technology officer of Linux vendor Red Hat who marched up San Francisco's Market Street last year in an ill-fated attempt to convince California lawmakers to sponsor an open-source bill--said he'd like to see all 50 states adopt a bill that would let open source in the government's door. "Open source has often been disparaged by traditional proprietary software companies," said Tiemann, who added that his company is not funding any of the current efforts. "There's probably been some prejudice against open-source software that has to be remedied." He thinks the open-source bills could be as important for citizens as the voting-right bills passed as a result of pressure from the civil rights movement. "There are very few Americans who are not affected by software in some way, shape or form," he said. From tomwhore at slack.net Wed Apr 9 18:47:03 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Wed Apr 9 14:46:48 2003 Subject: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <3E949295.6090608@endeavors.com> Message-ID: Shock and Awe Shock the budget and then go "AWww shucks folks, but its the patriotic thing to do, We had to use them bombs and stuffs somewherez. And now we need to restock so we can not use them against Korea" From jamesr at best.com Wed Apr 9 15:47:27 2003 From: jamesr at best.com (James Rogers) Date: Wed Apr 9 14:47:20 2003 Subject: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <52AF6C78-6ACC-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Message-ID: <004901c2fee1$9d2d65d0$f200000a@avalon> From: Jeff Bone > > Don't you have that backwards? I'm not sure how you could consider > dumping $1B worth of high-tech ordinance on somebody > "efficient" by any > definition, regardless of effect, particularly when compared > to a small > number of guys armed only with box cutters taking down > America for most > of a week. Huh? How the hell are you comparing these. If the guys with boxcutters successfully invaded the state of California, then you would have something. All they did was take down two towers. There are quite a number of ways to do that on a small budget, though admittedly they chose an interesting way of going about it. Blowing only a billion dollars of ordnance while taking a large country with few casualties in a matter of weeks is pretty damn efficient for that task. It certainly isn't comparable to dropping a couple skyscrapers. If the goal of the military was to drop the two towers, it would have cost them almost nothing. If the goal was merely to create a media spectacle, you might have a point. Given that this was not the goal in at least one of your two cases, your definition of "efficient" seems specious. > I'm sorry, but dropping the Twin Towers was > "shocking" and > "awesome." Taking out a few leadership targets with some high-tech > destructo-gadgetry amidst tank-plinking as usual, not so much. Wrong. You don't get to redefine the context of the term "Shock and Awe" to suit your argument. As the individuals who coined the phrase have stated repeatedly, the media and the public have been pulling the original meaning way out of context of what was originally written. >From the horse's mouth: "Rapid Dominance must be all-encompassing. It will require the means to anticipate and to counter all opposing moves. It will involve the capability to deny an opponent things of critical value, and to convey the unmistakable message that unconditional compliance is the only available recourse. It will imply more than the direct application of force. It will mean the ability to control the environment and to master all levels of an opponent's activities to affect will, perception, and understanding." ...and... "Rapid Dominance will strive to achieve a dominance that is so complete and victory [that] is so swift, that an adversary's losses in both manpower and material could be relatively light, and yet the message is so unmistakable that resistance would be seen as futile." You may not have been impressed watching bombs dropped on your TV, but the military wasn't trying to make *you* capitulate. It is about the surgical use of overwhelming and decisive force plus generating wholesale confusion and misinformation in an effort to make the enemy feel impotent and dazzled in such a way that it alters their mindset without actually having to "pave the battlefield". The point of "Shock and Awe" is changing the outlook of your enemy, not killing them. > (OB_FACT: less than 7% of the precision-guided bombs dropped so far > has been dropped on leadership targets; the bulk has been taking out > Iraqi armor and infantry divisions. Well, duh. Leadership pretty much by definition is a tiny fraction of the total high value targets. As a percentage of the whole, 7% is a stunningly *high* amount of ordnance compared to any other war I can think of. > But then, I'm also very confused about the tendency to refer to those > guys with box cutters and suicide bombers as "cowards" while we refer > to the guys that load launch tubes on boats 200m out at sea or drop > bombs from above-AA altitudes "courageous." I agree that in terms of the act itself, the box cutter gang required substantial courage compared to high-altitude bombers. However, some people use "coward" in the sense of a soldier intentionally engaging civilians rather than enemy soldiers because the civilians are easier targets. Western culture in particular makes a strong distinction between "combatants" and "non-combatants" as legitimate military targets. It is the old "never shoot an unarmed man" rule of engagement, which is by no means universal and which the hijackers' broke. Cheers, -James Rogers jamesr@best.com From jbone at deepfile.com Wed Apr 9 17:56:00 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 14:55:33 2003 Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set the record straight was Re: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <3E949295.6090608@endeavors.com> Message-ID: <0D13A049-6AD6-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> On Wednesday, Apr 9, 2003, at 16:37 US/Central, Gregory Alan Bolcer wrote: > Jeff, Efficiency is the relation of output to > input. Effectiveness is the total output. Thanks, I *understand* that --- and stand by my statement. I have no idea how you can consider "shock and awe" to be a desirable relationship of output to input, vs. other other strategies and tactics being discussed. Input: $Bs. Output: we're still getting shot at. Was that the most efficient manner of achieving out goals? I don't know. But even normalizing goals, i.e. output, vs. Al Qaeda's little number they did on us, I assert that they achieved their goals much more efficiently than we are achieving ours. > You > missed the point which was that the CONCEPT of > "shock and awe" is like acupuncture. Acupuncture --- by mallet, maybe! Nothing necessarily surgical at all about the "shock and awe" stratagem. I think you need to go reread the original brief on which "shock and awe" is based. http://www.dodccrp.org/shockIndex.html This is not your father's "surgical strike" doctrine... > Mininalist > input effect to maximum output effect. Thus, > the thread was that the term has been misapplied. No, you have misunderstood. > Are you saying taking out a building is the same > as taking out hundreds of buildings, social organizations, > real or perceived threats, and military weaponry? Not at all. I'm saying taking out a handful of buildings with nothing more than boxcutters and strength of will is, even normalizing output, far more efficient than what we've accomplished in Iraq with vastly more resources. That's all --- it's just more efficient. To think otherwise is badly broken-think. jb From tomwhore at slack.net Wed Apr 9 19:11:18 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Wed Apr 9 15:11:16 2003 Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set the recordstraight was Re: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <0D13A049-6AD6-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Message-ID: Shock and Awe..First we Kick them out of Kuwait..then we sanction them for a decade with the occasional bomb or two, then we blow the house down Thats a 50Bilion dollar (us) huff and puff not to mention the cost of 10 years of sanctions, no fly zones and Gulf War the Senior. Oh I see.. Sticker Shock...awesome dude. We dropped lots of expensive bombs that need replacing. Big Shock there. The enemy did not so much get hit by the bombs as they simply got scared, literaly, out of thier uniform and into civies. We will be spending lots of resources on the "enemy" as hey are now the savaged civilian population. They were shocked and awed right into a new carreer. What happened to the 10's of thousands of folks who reentered Iraq to fight the Americans? Are they on the Med lines now as well? Awesome The tribes mentality of the region, as with most tribal regions in the world, has the potential to fall onto some brutal times after the brutal times it has just gone trhough. Tribes mean killing off the other tribes or dominiating them. Power rules, tribes kill, peace keepers all around. Lotsof shock to come. France still has not surrendered, but watch them join in the grabfest to come. Awwwwwwboy Wheres Sadam? Anyone check the Russian Embasy? Is nothing shocking? Kurds and Turks and Sadam...Oh my...Northward.Awesom dude. And what about Afghanastan? Hows our follow up doing there? -tomwsmf From cherot at herot.com Wed Apr 9 19:24:41 2003 From: cherot at herot.com (Christopher Herot) Date: Wed Apr 9 15:24:09 2003 Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set the record straightwas Re: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <0D13A049-6AD6-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Message-ID: <000d01c2fee6$d4448a30$4ca18cd0@appliedmessaging.com> The "output" of bringing down a government isn't even on the same scale as leveling a few buildings. While 9/11 was certainly traumatic, the only lasting effect on the USA was to encourage our recent military adventures. While precision guided munitions are expensive, we have had to use a lot less tons of explosive than in many previous wars, lost less expensive planes (and expensive to train pilots), and lost less lives on both sides, than it took to invade, say, Stalingrad or Grozny. -----Original Message----- From: fork-bounces@xent.com [mailto:fork-bounces@xent.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Bone Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 5:56 PM To: Gregory Alan Bolcer Cc: fork@xent.com Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set the record straightwas Re: Newspeak On Wednesday, Apr 9, 2003, at 16:37 US/Central, Gregory Alan Bolcer wrote: > Jeff, Efficiency is the relation of output to > input. Effectiveness is the total output. Thanks, I *understand* that --- and stand by my statement. I have no idea how you can consider "shock and awe" to be a desirable relationship of output to input, vs. other other strategies and tactics being discussed. Input: $Bs. Output: we're still getting shot at. Was that the most efficient manner of achieving out goals? I don't know. But even normalizing goals, i.e. output, vs. Al Qaeda's little number they did on us, I assert that they achieved their goals much more efficiently than we are achieving ours. From tomwhore at slack.net Wed Apr 9 19:28:57 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Wed Apr 9 15:28:09 2003 Subject: Up a Takrit Message-ID: Sometimes, just sometimes, it sucks to live in a city where someone famous was born. "knock knock" "who is there?" "3 billion dollars in US artillery" "3 billion dollars in US artillery wh&*%#&(#(@!##(@#)*$)#@($)@#(*$" -tomwsmf From shields at msrl.com Wed Apr 9 23:32:29 2003 From: shields at msrl.com (Michael Shields) Date: Wed Apr 9 15:31:49 2003 Subject: Congressman defends bill to require CDMA in Iraq In-Reply-To: <003a01c2febb$aa9f20d0$f200000a@avalon> ("James Rogers"'s message of "Wed, 9 Apr 2003 10:15:48 -0700") References: <003a01c2febb$aa9f20d0$f200000a@avalon> Message-ID: <87of3fjo8y.fsf@mulligatwani.msrl.com> In article <003a01c2febb$aa9f20d0$f200000a@avalon>, "James Rogers" wrote: > 3) If you are going to build a wireless telecom infrastructure, CDMA in its > various forms is a substantially better technology than GSM. Which do you think is more important: technological superiority, or standardization? -- Shields. From jbone at deepfile.com Wed Apr 9 18:33:30 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 15:32:45 2003 Subject: Dispelling JR / GAB's Brain Fog Fever In-Reply-To: <004901c2fee1$9d2d65d0$f200000a@avalon> Message-ID: <49E37C5D-6ADB-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> On Wednesday, Apr 9, 2003, at 16:47 US/Central, James Rogers wrote: > Blowing only a billion dollars of ordnance while taking a large > country with > few casualties in a matter of weeks is pretty damn efficient for that > task. > It certainly isn't comparable to dropping a couple skyscrapers. If > the goal > of the military was to drop the two towers, it would have cost them > almost > nothing. Let me introduce you to my friend "normalization." By this process, we can compare apples and oranges by calling them both pears, then distorting other parts of the equation proportionally. ;-) OF COURSE dropping a couple of buildings isn't the same as taking out even an impoverished country's military and regime. But that --- strategic political objective achievement alone --- is not the comparison of interest. We're talking about "efficiency" -wrt- the Shock and Awe stratagem, and I'm asserting that (a) it's very difficult to measure the efficiency of Shock and Awe, because it's hard to measure the effects, and (b) it's beside the point anyway, entirely the wrong criteria to try to use, because Shock and Awe is all about "effectiveness." "Efficiency" in that context is a boondoggle. The comparison, as Greg IMHO correctly pointed out, is about the relationship of input to output. Shock and Awe itself isn't in any way about achieving a particular effect efficiently --- it's all about the effect, it's about rendering an enemy psychologically impotent. This does as a side-effect hopefully shorten the engagement / make it less costly in terms of casualties and materiel in the long haul. And yes, the latter *can* be measured, eventually, but none of us on this list are in any way equipped to perform that calculation at this time. Neither is CENTCOM, for that matter. Also pertinent: the actual strategy that ended up being deployed in GWII, FOX News talking heads and Rush Limbaugh aside, is not in fact Shock and Awe. It much more closely resembles the surgical strike doctrine employed during the Gulf War --- just much more intense. And surgical strike doctrine, like most modern warfighting doctrines, IS very concerned with efficiency. And on that basis, we can make some comparisons. Ignoring the particular operational theory behind Iraq for a moment, a fair set of metrics for input might be lives committed / spent and dollars spent on ordinance / materiel. A fair set of metrics for output might be lives taken / dollars in economic utility destroyed. == Al Qaeda, 9/11 == Input: 19 lives, $45 in box cutters, <$30,000 in plane fare. Output: 3300 lives taken, ~>$1T in direct and collateral economic damage Yield: 174-to-1 kill ratio, 33M-to-1 economic yield == USA v. Iraq, GWII == Input: dozens of lives, let's say 100, $B in costs, let's say $20B (low-side conservative) Output: 10k Iraqis (high-side conservative), $30B in in economic damages (~Iraqi GDP [1]) Yield: 100-to-1 kill ratio, 1.5-1 economic yield So whatever the current operational philosophy, it's CLEAR to anybody who can drive a $3 calculator and a Web browser that on at least two important dimensions asymmetric "terror" war is far more "efficient" than traditional warfare. And in terms of psychological output, it's hard to argue against the efficiency of terror: the U.S. economy and society is still reeling from 9/11, from the brilliantly sick application of 19 fanatic lives, 19 box cutters, and 19 plane tickets. And that was all I was really saying, here --- I was not criticizing Shock and Awe, surgical strike, or any other stratagem *or* our ability to achieve our goals efficiently. Because we are a law-abiding (ahem) nation-state, we do not have access to the tools of our opponents, the tools of asymmetric warfare. And therefore we will never achieve the levels of efficiency that terrorists achieve in their hostile endeavors. My point stands: "efficiency" is a characteristic of terrorism, Greg got it backwards, and my conclusion has been effectively demonstrated. jb [1] http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/irq3-22.htm From tomwhore at slack.net Wed Apr 9 19:41:46 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Wed Apr 9 15:40:57 2003 Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set the record straightwas Re: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <000d01c2fee6$d4448a30$4ca18cd0@appliedmessaging.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Apr 2003, Christopher Herot wrote: --] --]The "output" of bringing down a government isn't even on the same scale as --]leveling a few buildings. While 9/11 was certainly traumatic, the only --]lasting effect on the USA was to encourage our recent military adventures. And the Patriot acts, lets not forget the historic undoing of our nations charter. I mean think about it, the boxcutter gang spends a tiny bit of cash, takes down a major landmark and Shocks and Awes the target nation into such a state of hysteria they go and dismantle the very thing that makes thier country worthwhile. They flapped the butterflys wing and let the tsunami feed itself. I gota say, thats effeciency for ya. Also lets not forget that if you follow the logicbeing used, Bin Laden was behind the terrorists of 9/11, so there fore he is behind the froces that gutted our nations charter. He is also behind the forces that had us outs Saddam, some one Bin Laden did not like and is on record as wnating to get out of power. hmmmm Bin Ladden gets a hit on American soil which guts the charter of america and ousts Saddam from power in Iraq... I mean, thats pretty effecient. All that really needs to happen now is the factions in Iraq to start fighting each other such that every Islamic state and group will see fit to send in "help" and from that arises the Uber Islamic front with one thought on thier mind "Romanes Eunt Domus" Well ok, it wont be in latin and probably spelled right. -tomwsmf From tomwhore at slack.net Wed Apr 9 19:43:35 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Wed Apr 9 15:42:47 2003 Subject: Congressman defends bill to require CDMA in Iraq In-Reply-To: <87of3fjo8y.fsf@mulligatwani.msrl.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Apr 2003, Michael Shields wrote: --]Which do you think is more important: technological superiority, or --]standardization? Depends, which will bring in more revenue to American corps? Oh, as if you didnt realize thats the point..silly posters..:)- -tomwsmf From johnhall at isomedia.com Wed Apr 9 16:51:09 2003 From: johnhall at isomedia.com (johnhall) Date: Wed Apr 9 15:50:44 2003 Subject: Two minor items Message-ID: <000c01c2feea$86570f10$0400a8c0@JMHALL> http://www.donaldsensing.com/2003_04_01_archive.html#200120181 (the picture shows some newly freed Iraqis holding a banner which says "Go Home Human Shields, you US Wankers). On the same page, a little above the picture, was this: Les Am?ricains, zey have such humor, no? "I was out looking at some soldiers and one of them was sharing some cookies he had just received in the mail. A photographer walked over to him and asked in a heavy French accent for a cookie. The soldier glanced up and told him no cookies for anyone from France. The photographer claimed he was half Italian. Without missing a beat the soldier broke a cookie in half and handed it over." From cherot at herot.com Wed Apr 9 19:58:45 2003 From: cherot at herot.com (Christopher Herot) Date: Wed Apr 9 15:58:15 2003 Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set the record straightwas Re: Newspeak In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001201c2feeb$992eb560$4ca18cd0@appliedmessaging.com> You are right in that we have not yet seen the interesting part. Lots of people think we have the potential to "transform the region" although in which direction is not yet clear. I think the real lasting change will be in forcing the USA to come to terms with being the last world power. That's what the debate should really be about. -----Original Message----- From: Tom [mailto:tomwhore@slack.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 6:42 PM To: Christopher Herot Cc: 'Jeff Bone'; 'Gregory Alan Bolcer'; fork@xent.com Subject: RE: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set the record straightwas Re: Newspeak On Wed, 9 Apr 2003, Christopher Herot wrote: --] --]The "output" of bringing down a government isn't even on the same scale as --]leveling a few buildings. While 9/11 was certainly traumatic, the only --]lasting effect on the USA was to encourage our recent military adventures. And the Patriot acts, lets not forget the historic undoing of our nations charter. I mean think about it, the boxcutter gang spends a tiny bit of cash, takes down a major landmark and Shocks and Awes the target nation into such a state of hysteria they go and dismantle the very thing that makes thier country worthwhile. They flapped the butterflys wing and let the tsunami feed itself. I gota say, thats effeciency for ya. Also lets not forget that if you follow the logicbeing used, Bin Laden was behind the terrorists of 9/11, so there fore he is behind the froces that gutted our nations charter. He is also behind the forces that had us outs Saddam, some one Bin Laden did not like and is on record as wnating to get out of power. hmmmm Bin Ladden gets a hit on American soil which guts the charter of america and ousts Saddam from power in Iraq... I mean, thats pretty effecient. All that really needs to happen now is the factions in Iraq to start fighting each other such that every Islamic state and group will see fit to send in "help" and from that arises the Uber Islamic front with one thought on thier mind "Romanes Eunt Domus" Well ok, it wont be in latin and probably spelled right. -tomwsmf From gbolcer at endeavors.com Wed Apr 9 17:17:36 2003 From: gbolcer at endeavors.com (Gregory Alan Bolcer) Date: Wed Apr 9 16:19:20 2003 Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set the recordstraight was Re: Newspeak References: <0D13A049-6AD6-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Message-ID: <3E94AA10.3060602@endeavors.com> Silly, Jeff. 8-) You need to reread the original brief on shock and awe. [1]. "Surgical strike" is a completely different military doctrine, so I guess that the acupuncture was a really bad analogy. I was trying to make the point that the concept as originally conceived was more elegant in that it used "only just enough force for what was needed to accomplish the desired output." That was part of the criticism of the battle plan was that some critics thought we used too little. More precise would have been the oft used "decapitation strikes." Sun Tzu was famous for taking the heads off of the absolute minimum number of concubines to make examples of them. Perhaps that's what the military really meant by shock and awe instead of what's commonly been equated to "big fireworks." Anyone can take down a building, it takes something much more to change a culture. I think that the changes in US culture from 9/11 are far more subtle than the ones in Iraqi culture from the past 21 days. Greg [1] http://www.kimsoft.com/polwar.htm Jeff Bone wrote: > Acupuncture --- by mallet, maybe! Nothing necessarily surgical at all > about the "shock and awe" stratagem. I think you need to go reread the > original brief on which "shock and awe" is based. > > http://www.dodccrp.org/shockIndex.html > -- Gregory Alan Bolcer, CTO | work: +1.949.833.2800 gbolcer at endeavors.com | http://endeavors.com Endeavors Technology, Inc.| cell: +1.714.928.5476 From jamesr at best.com Wed Apr 9 17:30:34 2003 From: jamesr at best.com (James Rogers) Date: Wed Apr 9 16:29:40 2003 Subject: Congressman defends bill to require CDMA in Iraq In-Reply-To: <87of3fjo8y.fsf@mulligatwani.msrl.com> Message-ID: <004d01c2fef0$04ad0810$f200000a@avalon> From: Michael Shields > "James Rogers" wrote: > > 3) If you are going to build a wireless telecom > infrastructure, CDMA > > in its various forms is a substantially better technology than GSM. > > Which do you think is more important: technological > superiority, or standardization? It seems you are trying to create a false dichotomy. The economically correct answer is almost always in the middle. For long-term infrastructure investments, better technology almost always more than pays for itself over following an old tried-and-true "standard". Why bother deploying this newfangled long-haul fiber Ethernet or wireless IP doodad when we can use a ubiquitous telco standard like SONET/TDM? Speaking of GSM itself, I think the "standardization" is oversold, never mind that Europe is slowly making the move to CDMA technologies. I've owned GSM phones for many years. The only thing nice about them was the removable GSM chip, but just about everything else about them pretty much sucked. I no longer have a GSM phone because I can still roam the bloody continent and I get better service to boot using other protocols. Quite frankly, I don't think the world at large has a huge need for global telecom standardization; telecom only really needs to be standardized regionally. CDMA is more than sufficiently "standard" to be a reasonable solution. So yes, the standardization of GSM is worth about a nickel to the average Iraqi. The cost savings of having a modern CDMA system as opposed to a decrepit GSM system will be significant over the long run. In five years when the rest of the world is using CDMA-based systems, I doubt the Iraqis will be particularly happy that they have an almost new TDMA system that they just paid for. If you are going to do it, at least do it right. When putting in new infrastructure it is generally a better idea to standardize on what the standard will be tomorrow (CDMA) rather than what the standard was yesterday (TDMA/GSM). -James Rogers jamesr@best.com From gbolcer at endeavors.com Wed Apr 9 17:34:42 2003 From: gbolcer at endeavors.com (Gregory Alan Bolcer) Date: Wed Apr 9 16:36:20 2003 Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set the recordstraightwas Re: Newspeak References: Message-ID: <3E94AE12.6080402@endeavors.com> Tom wrote: > And the Patriot acts, lets not forget the historic undoing of our nations > charter. I mean think about it, the boxcutter gang spends a tiny bit of > cash, takes down a major landmark and Shocks and Awes the target nation > into such a state of hysteria they go and dismantle the very thing that > makes thier country worthwhile. They flapped the butterflys wing and let > the tsunami feed itself. > > I gota say, thats effeciency for ya. We'll go back to the green level soon. We're all kind of burnt out on orange anyways. That and those stupid new metal detectors that buzz on everything except sketchers. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020312-5.html Greg -- Gregory Alan Bolcer, CTO | work: +1.949.833.2800 gbolcer at endeavors.com | http://endeavors.com Endeavors Technology, Inc.| cell: +1.714.928.5476 From sdossick at yahoo.com Wed Apr 9 17:46:23 2003 From: sdossick at yahoo.com (Steve Dossick) Date: Wed Apr 9 16:45:41 2003 Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set the recordstraightwas Re: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <3E94AE12.6080402@endeavors.com> Message-ID: I don't know, I kind of like watching the metal-induced striptease hysteria at the airport these days. Soon we'll all just fly in our pajamas. ;) -s > From: Gregory Alan Bolcer > Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 16:34:42 -0700 > To: fork@xent.com > Subject: Re: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set the > recordstraightwas Re: Newspeak > .... > and those stupid new metal detectors that buzz > on everything except sketchers. > > > > > > > > From jm at jmason.org Wed Apr 9 17:48:49 2003 From: jm at jmason.org (Justin Mason) Date: Wed Apr 9 16:48:59 2003 Subject: Congressman defends bill to require CDMA in Iraq In-Reply-To: Message from "James Rogers" <004d01c2fef0$04ad0810$f200000a@avalon> Message-ID: <20030409234855.4E2358C6BE@localhost.jmason.org> James Rogers said: > Speaking of GSM itself, I think the "standardization" is oversold, never > mind that Europe is slowly making the move to CDMA technologies. Eh? Are they? Do you mean 3G? > I've owned > GSM phones for many years. The only thing nice about them was the removable > GSM chip, but just about everything else about them pretty much sucked. Can't comment, never owned a CDMA phone to compare.... > I > no longer have a GSM phone because I can still roam the bloody continent and > I get better service to boot using other protocols. Quite frankly, I don't > think the world at large has a huge need for global telecom standardization; > telecom only really needs to be standardized regionally. CDMA is more than > sufficiently "standard" to be a reasonable solution. Believe me, it's been nice to roam around Europe, SE Asia and Australia, sending the occasional SMS with my trusty GSM phone. Standardization of mobile technologies *is* nice. Of course, the phone is now living switched-off in a drawer because CDMA rulez over here in the US. > So yes, the standardization of GSM is worth about a nickel to the average > Iraqi. The cost savings of having a modern CDMA system as opposed to a > decrepit GSM system will be significant over the long run. In five years > when the rest of the world is using CDMA-based systems, I doubt the Iraqis > will be particularly happy that they have an almost new TDMA system that > they just paid for. If you are going to do it, at least do it right. When > putting in new infrastructure it is generally a better idea to standardize > on what the standard will be tomorrow (CDMA) rather than what the standard > was yesterday (TDMA/GSM). Alternatively, when rebuilding a shattered infrastructure, with little cash, it might be worth using whatever you can afford. --j. From tomwhore at slack.net Wed Apr 9 21:31:30 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Wed Apr 9 17:30:42 2003 Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set therecordstraightwas Re: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <3E94AE12.6080402@endeavors.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Apr 2003, Gregory Alan Bolcer wrote: --]We'll go back to the green level soon. Whoopdiefuckingdo. We go back to green and the legistlative branch takes the time limit off the patriot acts and its the defacto. So in the words of Officer barBrady "theres nothing to see here, move along" From jbone at deepfile.com Wed Apr 9 20:46:47 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 17:46:08 2003 Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set the recordstraight was Re: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <3E94AA10.3060602@endeavors.com> Message-ID: On Wednesday, Apr 9, 2003, at 18:17 US/Central, Gregory Alan Bolcer wrote: > Silly, Jeff. 8-) You need to reread the original > brief on shock and awe. [1]. "Surgical strike" > is a completely different military doctrine, Greg, Jesus, I SAID that! Are you paying attention AT ALL? I drew a clear distinction between them, and pointed out that in fact the operational philosophy we're working under is CLOSER to surgical strike than Shock and Awe, despite what the talking heads are saying. Sheesh, read for comprehension, Greg. jb From jamesr at best.com Wed Apr 9 18:51:45 2003 From: jamesr at best.com (James Rogers) Date: Wed Apr 9 17:50:52 2003 Subject: Congressman defends bill to require CDMA in Iraq In-Reply-To: <20030409234855.4E2358C6BE@localhost.jmason.org> Message-ID: <005201c2fefb$5c812890$f200000a@avalon> > James Rogers said: > > Speaking of GSM itself, I think the "standardization" is oversold, > > never mind that Europe is slowly making the move to CDMA > technologies. > > Eh? Are they? Do you mean 3G? 3G is CDMA2000 I believe, which is Qualcomm's baby. It is currently the market frontrunner in Europe and many other regions as the replacement for existing GSM/TDMA and earlier CDMA technologies. The Europeans are trying to create an alternate protocol standard (W-CDMA) that is a pseudo upgrade path for GSM (NIH syndrome and mostly intended to annoy Qualcomm) with essentially no redeeming values versus CDMA2000, but it is bogged down in politics or something. By the time a W-CDMA standard gets off the ground in any meaningful sense, CDMA2000 will already have a significant market presence in many regions. Even if W-CDMA gets pushed through as a fiat standard and displaces CDMA2000, it may remain as an essentially European standard because of the relatively glacial time to market. Either way, all the major European wireless telecom manufacturers have licensed CDMA technology from Qualcomm for their post-GSM services. Ironically, the European's may find themselves to be the odd ones out protocol-wise this time. I don't really care or follow this too closely; as long as my cellular service works well I'm happy. > Believe me, it's been nice to roam around Europe, SE Asia and > Australia, sending the occasional SMS with my trusty GSM > phone. Standardization of mobile technologies *is* nice. It is nice, but it doesn't trump everything else and standardization is relative. For Joe and Jane Six-Pack this is not an issue, and these people are far and away the biggest segment of the market. For these people, superior cellular network performance (just about the biggest source of complaints for most people) around their region is worth far more than compatibility with another country's network half-way around the world. In other words, what is the value for the average user in any country to be "standards compliant" with a network several thousand miles away if the trade-off is an inferior cellular network at home? Most people value good cellular service in their own country over the ability to use the phone in a remote locale. If the GSM networks had any fundamentally redeeming features beyond standardization then one could make a case for global GSM, but for Americans there really isn't a case and market competition has allowed CDMA to thrive in the US. > Alternatively, when rebuilding a shattered infrastructure, > with little cash, it might be worth using whatever you can afford. True, but when investing in infrastructure it is better to take the long view, and the Iraqis will undoubtedly have some economic flexibility with the US taxpayer bankrolling them. Cheers, -James Rogers jamesr@best.com From gbolcer at endeavors.com Wed Apr 9 18:54:04 2003 From: gbolcer at endeavors.com (Gregory Alan Bolcer) Date: Wed Apr 9 17:55:41 2003 Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set therecordstraight was Re: Newspeak References: Message-ID: <3E94C0AC.8000803@endeavors.com> Jeff Bone wrote: > > On Wednesday, Apr 9, 2003, at 18:17 US/Central, Gregory Alan Bolcer wrote: > >> Silly, Jeff. 8-) You need to reread the original >> brief on shock and awe. [1]. "Surgical strike" >> is a completely different military doctrine, > > > Greg, Jesus, I SAID that! Are you paying attention AT ALL? I drew a > clear distinction between them, and pointed out that in fact the > operational philosophy we're working under is CLOSER to surgical strike > than Shock and Awe, despite what the talking heads are saying. > > Sheesh, read for comprehension, Greg. I was making the argument that it's not closer to surgical strike. I see shock & awe, surgical strick, and rampant supremacy as three different points on a pyramid. Greg > > jb > > -- Gregory Alan Bolcer, CTO | work: +1.949.833.2800 gbolcer at endeavors.com | http://endeavors.com Endeavors Technology, Inc.| cell: +1.714.928.5476 From jbone at deepfile.com Wed Apr 9 21:05:14 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 18:04:34 2003 Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set therecordstraight was Re: Newspeak In-Reply-To: <3E94C0AC.8000803@endeavors.com> Message-ID: <7C5C5CEC-6AF0-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> On Wednesday, Apr 9, 2003, at 19:54 US/Central, Gregory Alan Bolcer wrote: > I was making the argument that it's not > closer to surgical strike. I see shock & awe, > surgical strick, and rampant supremacy as three > different points on a pyramid. You're right that they're not mutually exclusive, and it's not a continuum. But we haven't seen much "shock and awe" per the original paper --- the media having been the primary vehicle for that idea. Instead, this has just been our usual competent and rather more efficient than "shock and awe" warfighting technique. jb From jbone at deepfile.com Wed Apr 9 21:17:33 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 18:16:55 2003 Subject: [SPORK] Where are they, dammit?!? I KNOW they're here somewhere! Message-ID: <35420846-6AF2-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Iraq's weapons 'must be found' Donald Rumsfeld says finding Iraq's alleged banned weapons is still imperative - though evidence they exist is still thin. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2933923.stm ---- I don't know who is suffering from greater delusion / denial --- Rummy and the rest of the hawks, or that wacky Muhammed al-Sahhaf. At least Iraq's Minister of Information has an excuse for his bizarre de/re-construction of reality, i.e. Saddam's gun to his head. Rummy only *thinks* he has / has had Saddam's gun to his head. If they try really hard, maybe the Inner Circle of Darkness in D.C. can *will* these things into being. Maybe Asscruft can hold a prayer meeting or something, drum up a little divine intervention. It won't matter even if we do find them, though. At most we're going to find some little cache of strategically worthless gas canisters or something, and every "war party" nut in the country's going to start beating their chests, whooting, and saying "I told you so" --- entirely missing the point that whatever kinds of "WMD" they might have probably aren't really very M or D and never really posed a threat to us in the first place. jb -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 1410 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lair.xent.com/pipermail/fork/attachments/20030409/eeadd979/attachment.bin From bill at whump.com Wed Apr 9 19:37:52 2003 From: bill at whump.com (Bill Humphries) Date: Wed Apr 9 18:36:08 2003 Subject: Londonium 2 - 5 May Message-ID: <0B9DE0A4-6AF5-11D7-BFB7-003065F62CD6@whump.com> I don't know how many FoRKers are in London, but I'll be there from Friday the 2nd through Monday morning the 5th (I found a great deal on Northwest Airlines) and staying close to the City (still looking for the best deal on a hotel.) If you're in the area and want to meet for dinner, lunch, or play native guide for a couple of hours, let me know. I'll definitely need to locate a map of public WiFi nodes, as well. ---- Bill Humphries http://www.whump.com/moreLikeThis/ From joe at barrera.org Wed Apr 9 20:42:21 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Wed Apr 9 19:41:38 2003 Subject: Majority Leader Tom Delay Supports the FairTax! In-Reply-To: <200304100235.h3A2ZHva012083@pollux.chuck> References: <200304100235.h3A2ZHva012083@pollux.chuck> Message-ID: <3E94DA0D.8080404@barrera.org> Woodchuck wrote: > This is my first post to FoRK. Hi, I'm a varmint. You've made a great first impression, let me tell you. - Joe From eh at mad.scientist.com Thu Apr 10 00:53:40 2003 From: eh at mad.scientist.com (Eirikur Hallgrimsson) Date: Wed Apr 9 20:52:36 2003 Subject: HB 2892, Oregon making sense In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200304092353.40759.eh@mad.scientist.com> What an interesting fight. I'm a Free Software geek, and an anarchist. Which side should I be on? I don't buy the MS argument that "the government can do this already," because it's pretty clear that in the US, government mostly won't consider non-commercial software. This is actually rather unusual in a world where the at least defense department has fairly often subsidized boutique firms by having them build special versions of commercially available gear. In some cases this is quite justified based on military requirements, but there are the well-known cases of bomber toilet seat (hardware store items were probably considered too heavy, but consider the airline industry) and the hammer. I'm trying to say that for a government agency to use the Apache server, or a BSD OS, with support and customization from a contractor, would be pretty much in line with at least military procurement. I have heard rumors of DOD use of Linux, but I don't have references. I also don't buy the "good guys" argument that using non-commercial software will save the citizens money. Certainly not at first. Maybe not later. I don't know what an MS windows user "seat" costs the government, on average, per year, but it probably is a fraction of the support cost for that user. The support cost probably won't go down if the user is switched to non-commercial software. The devil's advocate in me says that increased support costs would offset the licence fees formerly paid to Microsoft. Linux, BSD, and Apache and friends will probably sneak their noses into the .gov tent starting with servers, just as it has been with industry. It has certainly caused cost savings to server OEMs, who don't have to pay Bill, but I don't see that one could support that it has lowered end-user costs, even for large-scale enterprizes. Politicians, even amateurs, like to talk about money because it's simple and pretty uncontroversial, but the relationship between government and worldview/ideology is what's really at issue here. I think the costs would be a wash. Eirikur From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 00:13:51 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 21:13:12 2003 Subject: Majority Leader Tom Delay Supports the FairTax! In-Reply-To: <3E94DA0D.8080404@barrera.org> Message-ID: On Wednesday, Apr 9, 2003, at 21:42 US/Central, Joseph S Barrera III wrote: > Woodchuck wrote: >> This is my first post to FoRK. Hi, I'm a varmint. > > You've made a great first impression, let me tell you. Yeah, we usually start with a "here's who I am" message. Aside from that, I'm just going to do this offline. Sigh. So little time, so many idiots. jb From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 00:40:43 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 21:40:08 2003 Subject: Two bits on "Woody's" rant / FairTax Message-ID: <96C19CCA-6B0E-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> First, I'm endlessly amused that I got gender-switched w/o my knowledge. "Ms Bone" indeed. Gosh, I feel all pretty now. ;-) Second, a little bit of personal background on FairTax: It's not a Republican initiative, and my biggest concern about Tom DeLay lining up behind it is that it might be a credibility-losing proposition. I met the one of the guys behind it --- Grover G. Jackson --- at one of Michael Rothschild's Bionomics conferences back in '96. The general ideological constituency at that conference could probably best be described as "Libertarian" --- Virginia Postrel was also there, for example. (A speaker list can be found at [1], including yours truly.) The economic brainpower at that conference was unrivaled in my experience. And Mr. Jackson was well received. In several conversations with Mr. Jackson during that conference, I voiced many objections to the FairTax idea. My immediate, knee-jerk reaction was very negative. Mr. Jackson had reasonable answers that, in fact, were very, very well-researched and well-supported. More to the point, he was questioned much more intently by folks who, frankly, were a lot better equipped than I was at that time to debate tax policy with an expert. And for years, I've tried to find problems with the FairTax proposal. Bottom line, I've become convinced through several years of consideration, discussion, and research on these issues. That shouldn't convince anybody else, but at least it should hopefully demonstrate that this is an informed --- albeit possibly misinformed --- opinion. Wrong, maybe --- naive, no. Understand the options, research them thoroughly, understand the consequences, and make your own decisions. That's all I've attempted to do. Bottom line: I believe all taxes are theft. But I've become a pragmatist in my advanced age. ;-) I've decided that holding out for an ideal that will never materialize is rather stupid; better to have practical, realizable incremental improvements. There are really only three possibility for tax reform (or non-reform) that we are likely to see in our lifetime: * status quo * flat income / withholding tax * FairTax Finally --- it's odd to me that people who are opposed to taxes ideologically --- as our friend Woody appears to be, and as am I modulo pragmatism --- so often line up on the side of status quo when faced with the above alternatives. I guess change is scary, after all. jb [1] http://www.bionomics.org/text/events/conf96/schedule.html From shields at msrl.com Thu Apr 10 06:11:05 2003 From: shields at msrl.com (Michael Shields) Date: Wed Apr 9 22:10:23 2003 Subject: Congressman defends bill to require CDMA in Iraq In-Reply-To: <004d01c2fef0$04ad0810$f200000a@avalon> ("James Rogers"'s message of "Wed, 9 Apr 2003 16:30:34 -0700") References: <004d01c2fef0$04ad0810$f200000a@avalon> Message-ID: <87y92jhr86.fsf@mulligatwani.msrl.com> In article <004d01c2fef0$04ad0810$f200000a@avalon>, "James Rogers" wrote: > Speaking of GSM itself, I think the "standardization" is oversold, never > mind that Europe is slowly making the move to CDMA technologies. It's not clear to me that the CDMA->CDMA2000 transition would really be much less expensive than the GSM->CDMA2000 or GSM->W-CDMA transitions. > I've owned > GSM phones for many years. The only thing nice about them was the removable > GSM chip, but just about everything else about them pretty much sucked. Well, this is a matter of opinion. I am extremely unimpressed with current CDMA phones, especially since Motorola's new models are actually larger and heavier than the previous generation (V8160). My new Ericsson T600 (800/1800/1900 GSM) is far superior. > no longer have a GSM phone because I can still roam the bloody continent and > I get better service to boot using other protocols. Quite frankly, I don't > think the world at large has a huge need for global telecom standardization; > telecom only really needs to be standardized regionally. I don't agree with you, but for the sake of argument let's say regional standardization is enough. Iraq is about the size of California, and GSM is used by all of its neighbors. Do you think that is a large enough region? -- Shields. From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 01:24:02 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Wed Apr 9 22:23:21 2003 Subject: [FUNNY SPORK] About the looting... Message-ID: SO they looted all the government and public buildings... including the universities. Now there's a Bedouin sitting in a tent thirty miles southeast of Baghdad with his three wives, no electricity, and a very expensive neutral gas ion mass spectrometer. I bet he's having a very unpleasant conversation: WIFE #1 - Our neighbor in the third tent over, Abdul Akmed Rashid Hussein Al-Wallalah Al-Wahab got his wives a really nice table - what in the Seven Hells were you thinking, you illegitimate son of a camel! Curse be upon your beard! WIFE #2 - Yeah! WIFE #3 - Yeah! MAN - [looks at camera, shrugs] Wah-wah-wah-waaah. :-) jb From fork_list at hotmail.com Thu Apr 10 00:00:27 2003 From: fork_list at hotmail.com (Mr. FoRK) Date: Wed Apr 9 22:55:10 2003 Subject: Two minor items References: <000c01c2feea$86570f10$0400a8c0@JMHALL> Message-ID: Here's some posters I'd love to see hanging over the freeway tomorrow... ----- Original Message ----- From: "johnhall" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 3:51 PM Subject: Two minor items http://www.donaldsensing.com/2003_04_01_archive.html#200120181 (the picture shows some newly freed Iraqis holding a banner which says "Go Home Human Shields, you US Wankers). On the same page, a little above the picture, was this: Les Am?ricains, zey have such humor, no? "I was out looking at some soldiers and one of them was sharing some cookies he had just received in the mail. A photographer walked over to him and asked in a heavy French accent for a cookie. The soldier glanced up and told him no cookies for anyone from France. The photographer claimed he was half Italian. Without missing a beat the soldier broke a cookie in half and handed it over." -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: NoIraqWarden.gif Type: image/gif Size: 22965 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lair.xent.com/pipermail/fork/attachments/20030409/36735e99/NoIraqWarden-0001.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: NowIraqFree.gif Type: image/gif Size: 17397 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lair.xent.com/pipermail/fork/attachments/20030409/36735e99/NowIraqFree-0001.gif From fork_list at hotmail.com Thu Apr 10 00:08:31 2003 From: fork_list at hotmail.com (Mr. FoRK) Date: Wed Apr 9 23:03:56 2003 Subject: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe" let's set the record straightwas Re: Newspeak References: <0D13A049-6AD6-11D7-8D1A-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Message-ID: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Bone" > Input: $Bs. Output: we're still getting shot at. > Was that the most efficient manner of achieving out goals? What, you were hoping for a neutron bomb? Or is it uncomfortable to think that the military didn't /want/ to kill lots of people? From joe at barrera.org Thu Apr 10 03:55:29 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Thu Apr 10 03:00:58 2003 Subject: Majority Leader Tom Delay Supports the FairTax! In-Reply-To: <200304100727.h3A7R5a6004949@pollux.chuck> References: <200304100727.h3A7R5a6004949@pollux.chuck> Message-ID: <3E953F91.40907@barrera.org> Woodchuck wrote: > Since your other assertions contain errors about elementary, > self-evident things, and since you have shown a tendency to lie for > advantage or effect, in this thread and elsewhere, I, barring other > evidence, continue in the cautious belief that your sex is not > known. Out of delicacy, I will refer to you as Ms Bone, it being > customary, when in doubt, to use the higher-ranking title. It is > more euphonious as well. And I shall refer to you as rim-licking goat-fucking cock-gobbler. Or RLGFCG for short. Welcome to my kill-file, troll. Jeff: why are you even wasting your time? - Joe From joe at barrera.org Thu Apr 10 05:40:10 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Thu Apr 10 04:39:26 2003 Subject: Majority Leader Tom Delay Supports the FairTax! In-Reply-To: <3E953F91.40907@barrera.org> References: <200304100727.h3A7R5a6004949@pollux.chuck> <3E953F91.40907@barrera.org> Message-ID: <3E95581A.6030402@barrera.org> Dear Ms. Woodchuck, I have to apologize. I forgot "ass-sniffing". So that would be RLASGFCG. Sincerely yours, - Joe P.S. Get the fuck off my list. From deafbox at hotmail.com Thu Apr 10 14:10:06 2003 From: deafbox at hotmail.com (Russell Turpin) Date: Thu Apr 10 06:09:19 2003 Subject: Metal and airport security (was: Before GAB redefines "Shock and Awe") Message-ID: Steve Dossick: >I don't know, I kind of like watching the metal-induced striptease hysteria >at the airport these days. Soon we'll all just fly in our pajamas. I just took a sailing harness and tether through security at three different airports, with nary a problem. The harness has two stainless steel rings 2" in diameter. The tether has a snap shackle and two Winchard hooks. It raised a couple of eyebrows, but they only inspected it one time out of four. (But on't try to fly with a CO2 cartridge. The word on the street is that those things raise the alarm.) _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 09:17:02 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 06:16:30 2003 Subject: Terrorism: Efficient. Shock and Awe: Effective [recap for ADD victims] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thursday, Apr 10, 2003, at 01:08 US/Central, Mr. FoRK wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff Bone" > >> Input: $Bs. Output: we're still getting shot at. >> Was that the most efficient manner of achieving out goals? > What, you were hoping for a neutron bomb? > Or is it uncomfortable to think that the military didn't /want/ to > kill lots > of people? Oh, give it up "Mr. FoRK." This discussion was purely a discussion of efficiency in warfighting. Quick recap: (1) Greg Bolcer claimed that the "shock and awe" stratagem was "efficient" while terrorism was "effective." (2) I claimed that he got that backwards; (3) he said no he didn't and proceeded to (correctly) define "efficiency" as ratio of input to output; (4) I agreed with his definition of efficiency, then attempted to demonstrate that the current stratagem was not as "efficient" as terrorism on a couple of interesting dimensions; [1] (5) I also provided the caveat that the current stratagem is not a pure "shock and awe" play per the brief [2] but rather more like the surgical strike doctrine we've been using ever since we started building precision-guided munitions in large numbers. That's IT. That's the whole sum of my argument, positions, and conclusions. [1] ...from the relevant previous message: == Al Qaeda, 9/11 == Input: 19 lives, $45 in box cutters, <$30,000 in plane fare. Output: 3300 lives taken, ~>$1T in direct and collateral economic damage Yield: 174-to-1 kill ratio, 33,000,000-to-1 economic yield == USA v. Iraq, GWII == Input: dozens of lives, let's say 100, $B in costs, let's say $20B (low-side conservative) Output: 10k Iraqis (high-side conservative), $30B in in economic damages (~Iraqi GDP [1]) Yield: 100-to-1 kill ratio, 1.5-1 economic yield So whatever the current operational philosophy, it's CLEAR to anybody who can drive a $3 calculator and a Web browser that on at least two important dimensions asymmetric "terror" war is far more "efficient" than traditional warfare. And in terms of psychological output, it's hard to argue against the efficiency of terror: the U.S. economy and society is still reeling from 9/11, from the brilliantly sick application of 19 fanatic lives, 19 box cutters, and 19 plane tickets. [2] ...the "Shock and Awe" brief: http://www.dodccrp.org/shockIndex.html 'nuf said, jb From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 09:18:56 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 06:18:31 2003 Subject: Meds for Woody In-Reply-To: <200304100727.h3A7R5a6004949@pollux.chuck> Message-ID: On Thursday, Apr 10, 2003, at 02:27 US/Central, Woodchuck wrote: > Jeff Bone wrote > >>> Now let us observe how Ms Bone reacts to that innocent (and private) >>> correction: >> >> Innocent and not so private correction: that's Mr. Bone to you, >> varmint. I really don't know how to respond to somebody who is too >> stupid to discern the gender of the person they are talking to before >> employing such contractions. > > There is nothing in evidence, save your assertion, concerning your > sex. ("Gender" is a term used in linguistics, at least by those > who care.) Besides, you first name is ambiguous. Yes, I too know many female people named... "Jeff?" I have one word for you, Woody: MEDS. Take 'em, really, you'll feel much better. jb From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 09:22:39 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 06:21:56 2003 Subject: Majority Leader Tom Delay Supports the FairTax! In-Reply-To: <200304100727.h3A7R5a6004949@pollux.chuck> Message-ID: <8066F192-6B57-11D7-88EA-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> One other point, just to illustrate how absurd and nonsensical your whole spew is, Woody: On Thursday, Apr 10, 2003, at 02:27 US/Central, Woodchuck wrote: > At no point did I call the current system "voluntary". Actually, you did one several occasions during your massive verbal torrent. As just one example, from the original message, to wit: "Income tax is voluntary -- just stop earning income." So, yes, you did in fact call the current system voluntary, which was the whole point of contention in the first place. Now, begone, troll! jb From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 09:24:42 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 06:24:14 2003 Subject: Majority Leader Tom Delay Supports the FairTax! In-Reply-To: <3E953F91.40907@barrera.org> Message-ID: On Thursday, Apr 10, 2003, at 04:55 US/Central, Joseph S Barrera III wrote: > Welcome to my kill-file, troll. > > Jeff: why are you even wasting your time? I'm rather amused by it. Low entertainment threshold, I guess... ;-) jb From deafbox at hotmail.com Thu Apr 10 15:07:49 2003 From: deafbox at hotmail.com (Russell Turpin) Date: Thu Apr 10 07:07:34 2003 Subject: Why the FairTax isn't and won't be. Here's something better .. Message-ID: Jeff, I'm entirely on the side that thinks the income tax is particularly pernicious and should be eliminated. But I think the "fair" tax and other consumption tax schemes are so problematic that they practically serve to keep the income tax system in place, by presenting such poor alternatives to it. There are several problems with the "fair" tax. First, consumption taxes aren't fair. Even with a "povery level" exemption, people who are poor or middle class consume far more, as a fraction of income or wealth, than those who are rich. Because of how "consumption" is defined, some of the things the rich use or consume will go completely untaxed, e.g., land, baseball teams, and anything that can be made to look like a capital good or investment. Bill Gates will sell his stock tax-free, and buy a thousand acres of Washington forest tax-free, while Joe Shmoe gets whacked for 23% on his clothes, bicycle, books, music, pots, and pans. Second, a consumption tax, by focusing on just one kind of transaction, pretty severely distorts the economy. Now yes, no tax is truly neutral, and the income tax, which mostly acts as a payroll tax, is also bad in this regard. But a retail tax is even worse. In case you haven't read, consumption is the one thing that has kept the current economic malaise from turning into a real recession. (So far.) Are you sure that *that* is what you want to tax, to the exclusion of everything else? Third and related to the above, I don't think the proponents of the "fair" tax have thought about its international consequences. A 23% retail tax, which is what this actually is, would cause massive purchasing from overseas. Think Canadian pharmacies, multiplied a thousand-fold. Now, yes, that can be cured, by imposing a 23% import duty to go along with the retail tax, and every domestic business from the auto makers to Dell would insist on this. Do you also impose a 23% export duty? If not, every one of our trading partners will launch a campaign against our new tax system, that it subsidizes exports by making them completely tax free, at the expense of imports and internal consumption. Now yeah, that might be a good thing for the US, until other nations do likewise, it's still necessary to think about how many treaties and trade agreements this violates. And if we do impose such an export duty, what are the economic effects of that? How much bigger does our current account deficit grow? How do we modify NAFTA? A large part of the problem is that 23% is a HUGE slice of the pie. It doesn't get lost in the wash. I think a more realistic and fair solution that does not so greatly distort the economy is a broader-based transaction tax. Instead of a rate of 23%, think of a rate that is a small fraction of that, say 3%. But apply it to all transactions, wholesale as well as retail, and include real estate, acquisitions, equity purchases, interest, and other capital transactions. (Don't worry: there will still be liquidity in the equity markets, because short and speculative trades will be made as options, futures, and derivatives, rather than in the stock itself. In other words, an arbitreur, instead of buying shares at a 50$/shr, will purchase a six-month option at $2/shr or a two-year LEAP at $5/shr, so the effective tax rate to "control" a position is .1% or .3% of the position, or something else so small that it does get lost in the wash.) Yeah, there is still some issue with imports or exports, but not nearly so large an issue as with the "fair" tax. A transaction tax is simpler than the retail tax, because there is no need to distinguish between retail and wholesale purchases, to identify wholesale dealers, or to acquire a retail tax certificate. When money changes hands, it gets taxed. There would have to be some rules about which party collects and pays. Since businesses already track what theyt buy, sell, or broker, there's not much added accounting. And yeah, let's except transactions between inviduals for small items and labor, so that you don't have to worry about hiring a yardman or selling your computer. _________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 10:25:43 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 07:25:11 2003 Subject: Why the FairTax isn't and won't be. Here's something better .. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5023B483-6B60-11D7-88EA-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> On Thursday, Apr 10, 2003, at 09:07 US/Central, Russell Turpin wrote: > A transaction tax is simpler than the retail tax, Yes, yes, we discussed this ad nauseam months ago. And I agree with you on some points. I am unconvinced that FairTax is the recipe for doom that you and Woody seem to think it is; it's been analyzed for a very long time by people that are economically a lot more sophisticated than any of us on this list. (Not that argument from authority is convincing in itself, but neither is vague assertions of economic doom if you simply shift the price tag of gov't around.) Bottom line is this: I don't see a transaction tax proposal on the table, and I'm not interested in supporting idealistic endeavors that have no foreseeable practical consequence. The FairTax effort has been ongoing for several years now, and it's starting to get some amount of momentum. Transaction tax isn't even to square zero, and we need substantial tax reform sooner rather than later. I think that FairTax has a reasonable if outside shot, and of the three options (status quo, flat tax, FairTax) I'll pick FairTax. I'd be happier with flat tax, too. jb From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 10:46:28 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 07:45:56 2003 Subject: FairTax, doom, and net-net In-Reply-To: <5023B483-6B60-11D7-88EA-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> Message-ID: <35D9C9EA-6B63-11D7-88EA-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> The only major IMHO convincing arguments against the FairTax revolve around the idea that consumption will go down overall, which will have a damaging effect on the economy in net. The other main arguments are (1) It's not "progressive" enough --- a BS argument, you've failed to really analyze the effect if you don't think it's even more "progressive" than what we have now, cf. below. (2) All tax is theft. True --- I completely agree --- but we're never going to see that, I'm looking for options with at least an outside shot at practicality. So neither of those objections is very convincing to me. Let's do a little gedanken experiment, here: (1) You get productive use of [tax bracket, let's say ~1/3 = 50%] more of your economic utility (2) Prices go down as a result of elimination of many other "hidden" taxes and built-in costs Do you really think people will buy less because of sticker shock at a 23% retail tax? I don't. I think the drop in prices alone will offset the tax for the most part, and the increase in available, useful income will further tip the balance. I think consumption will go *way* up, which is a good thing. When people have more of their money to spend, they're going to spend it. Put more simply: if you could have a 50% raise, but knew that there was going to be a 23% sales tax if you took it... wouldn't you take it anyway? What if that 50% raise was accompanied by a drop in base prices of goods? And for all you progressivists out there: that 50% raise is going to have a lot greater utility impact on the lower and middle income brackets. Further sweeten the pot by exempting the first $X of consumption. Now we're talking, huh? But that's not just my bet, that's the whole premise behind FairTax. You rolls the dice, you takes your chances. :-) jb From deafbox at hotmail.com Thu Apr 10 16:09:28 2003 From: deafbox at hotmail.com (Russell Turpin) Date: Thu Apr 10 08:08:41 2003 Subject: FairTax, doom, and net-net Message-ID: Jeff Bone: >And for all you progressivists out there: that 50% raise is going to have >a lot greater utility impact on the lower and middle income brackets. I don't think so. The lower and middle income tax brackets won't get a 50% raise, because their effective tax rate is far less than 33%. They will be trading a 7% raise or a 12% raise against a 23% sales tax. Even among the upper income brackets, you're confusing the marginal rate with the effective rate. But yeah, you clearly come out ahead once your effective rate approaches 20%. The fact that this is a dollar benefit for so many people, especially those paying more tax, makes me suspicious that the proponents have fudged the numbers, and have not determined a rate that produces revenue neutrality. Since they're trading one kind of tax for another, THERE CANNOT BE A DOLLAR BENEFIT OVERALL. If there is, it is not revenue neutral, and loses on that ground. You have described how virtually everyone with an effective tax rate above 20% is a dollar winner. Who are the dollar losers? There had better be a lot of them, to make up for the dollar winners. Who are they? Figure that out, and the politics of the proposal follows. _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 11:28:25 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 08:27:49 2003 Subject: FairTax, doom, and net-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <124E2873-6B69-11D7-88EA-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> On Thursday, Apr 10, 2003, at 10:09 US/Central, Russell Turpin wrote: > Jeff Bone: >> And for all you progressivists out there: that 50% raise is going to >> have a lot greater utility impact on the lower and middle income >> brackets. > > I don't think so. > > The lower and middle income tax brackets won't get > a 50% raise, because their effective tax rate is > far less than 33%. Right, this was a mistake on my part. I shouldn't've quantified the raise. If, say, they are in the lowest non-zero tax bracket - 20%? - they'll get an effective 25% raise. If they are below the taxable line, they won't get a raise at all --- but by the same token, they won't pay any more tax than they do now, i.e. none, as consumption below that same line (or lower) isn't taxed at all. So: Lowest income: no direct change, indirect change in the form of lower pre-tax prices for goods Low, middle, high income: increased spendable wealth, i.e. a raise - and a substantial one at that For the poorest Americans, this is no worse than what they've got now, and for the bulk of all Americans it is a significant increase in purchasing power. This doesn't doom consumption, it increases it. > Since they're trading one kind of tax for another, > THERE CANNOT BE A DOLLAR BENEFIT OVERALL. If there > is, it is not revenue neutral, and loses on that > ground. You have described how virtually everyone > with an effective tax rate above 20% is a dollar > winner. Who are the dollar losers? There had better > be a lot of them, to make up for the dollar winners. The dollar losers are the parasites that suck up utility in the current system. It's nearsighted to look at this purely in revenue collection terms --- the bet is that overall liquidity and productivity in the economy increase because of the increased spending power for the masses, and this translates into equivalent or higher revenue collection. So you're not just shifting one tax to another --- you are improving some of the fundamentals in the economy, offsetting the dollar-loss on a false "all other things being equal" basis. I would suggest you read some of the FAQs for FairTax, particularly "Average Americans," [1] "Wages," [2] and "Stable Government Revenue" [3] for a more detailed (and accurate) analysis. A complete list of FAQs can be found at [4]. jb [1] http://www.fairtax.org/pdfs/averageamericans.pdf [2]http://www.fairtax.org/pdfs/wages.pdf [3] http://www.fairtax.org/pdfs/stable%20government%20revenue.pdf [4] http://www.fairtax.org/research.asp?PageID=21 From deafbox at hotmail.com Thu Apr 10 17:07:33 2003 From: deafbox at hotmail.com (Russell Turpin) Date: Thu Apr 10 09:06:47 2003 Subject: FairTax, doom, and net-net Message-ID: Jeff Bone: >If, say, they are in the lowest non-zero tax bracket - 20%? - they'll get >an effective 25% raise. Again, I think this confuses marginal and effective rate. Most people who are in the 20% bracket have an effective tax rate quite a bit below 20%. >The dollar losers are the parasites that suck up utility in the current >system. Well, of course. The blood-sucking parasites are the targeted losers in any proposed tax change, right? I'm just a bit confused about how this proposed change targets that group and whom its proponents put in that group. It's not clear to me that someone in the 20% income bracket, whose effective tax rate is, say, 5%, automatically falls into that category. That characterizes a lot of voters, and that is precisely where the political fight will be aimed, which is why the FairTax is a lost cause, no matter how much talk it has gathered in conservative circles. Personally, I would love it. It would decrease my federal taxes by five orders of magnitude, something of which I'm quite aware this month. So yeah, if it comes up for a vote, I'll lobby my congressmen. But it won't get that far. _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 12:08:53 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 09:08:16 2003 Subject: Majority Leader Tom Delay Supports the FairTax! In-Reply-To: <200304101537.h3AFbU9A018317@pollux.chuck> Message-ID: Let me point out your inconsistency, inaccuracy, and general lack of capacity to productively discuss this topic. On Thursday, Apr 10, 2003, at 10:37 US/Central, Woodchuck wrote: >> "Income tax is voluntary -- just stop earning income." > > I suggest your "sarcasm detection" ability to be either attenuated > or volitional for the purpose of seeming to make a point. INCONSISTENT. If I have treated your statement as serious it is because you yourself supported it by claims of your own behavior -wrt- taxation. I.e., you really do seem to regard this as a valid option. > Not yet. First you have to stop lying. So... I may be wildly delusional, pulling your leg, earnest but incorrect in my conclusions, misinformed --- any number of things that dilute the credibility of the statements I've offered. But "lying" implies intent to deceive --- and I have no such intent. So: INACCURATE. NB, I assume you're still hung up on the use of the term "voluntary," making that the basis for your claim of lying. I've already pointed out that in a strict sense, you are correct: FairTax is not, in the strictest sense, "voluntary." Please substitute "MORE VOLITIONAL THAN INCOME TAXES" for the previous term, and accept my earnest apologies for using the word more loosely than you would like. Finally, UNPRODUCTIVE: you seem to have taken my original post, merely passing along data about a proposal that I think has significant merits, as a personal attack on your entire value system. If you'd take a moment to breathe, take your meds, or whatever --- you'd see that you and I are more aligned than not on the ideological landscape. I hate taxes. You apparently hate taxes. The major difference is merely one of pragmatism and priors; I simply regard this as a more likely positive change than holding out for a tax-free America. BTW, I love a good ad hominem fest as much (more!) than anybody, but you seem to be struggling to make a point and your tactics are interfering with this. Please try to make one, if you have one. If your only issue was the word "voluntary" --- I think we've taken care of that, haven't we? $0.02, jb From bitbitch at magnesium.net Thu Apr 10 13:15:05 2003 From: bitbitch at magnesium.net (bitbitch@magnesium.net) Date: Thu Apr 10 09:14:13 2003 Subject: Majority Leader Tom Delay Supports the FairTax! In-Reply-To: <200304101537.h3AFbU9A018317@pollux.chuck> References: <200304101537.h3AFbU9A018317@pollux.chuck> Message-ID: <18091979689.20030410121505@magnesium.net> W> Not yet. First you have to stop lying. W> D. Oh oh ! If he stops lying will you stop trolling and/or go away? Your whole sex classification system is severely out of whack. To lie != female. Silly assumptions of the sort you were alluding at (since you never did honestly come out and say it) are unnecessary. Furthermore, I'd wager good money, that in a test, Mr. Jeff Bone could better discern _his_ sex, than you could in the distant void. Challenging him on it is a lost cause on your part. I demand bits from the newbie. Here, I'll start you off: Maryland Spammer gets slammed: "In what can only be described as a victory for all that's good and decent in the world, a judge ruled that an internet spammer had no right to have his personal information kept from being posted to Internet bulletin boards and discussion groups which are dedicated to the 'outing' of spammers," MAYORBOB writes. "The spammer's name is George A. Moore, and he owns and operates Maryland Internet Marketing Inc., which sells nutritional weight-loss products. Moore has been identified as a major spammer by at least one spam-tracking organization. http://www.plastic.com/article.html?sid=03/04/09/02465557 PErsonally I like this. I'm bummed its just a District Court decision, and some enterprising AC judge will probably overturn the ruling if it gets appealled. BUt at least there is calm in the world right now. -- Best regards, bitbitch mailto:bitbitch@magnesium.net From tomwhore at slack.net Thu Apr 10 13:27:57 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Thu Apr 10 09:27:06 2003 Subject: FairTax, doom, and net-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Now comes the interesting the interesting bits... We moev away from the Federal Payroll taxes and on to a per transaction tax. Does this cover EVERY transaction? Where I think this would be both great, from my viewpoint, and horrible, from the tax collectors veiwpoint, would be in alternative exchange mediums. For instance Ithica Hours [1], who even tell you hwo to set one up yourself [2], and many have [3]. Even casual bartering would be a great way to decrease you federal transactional spending. Also, if transactional exchanges become the Fed tax source, how long to maryjane gets her coming out party? Some thoughts. [1] http://www.ithacahours.org/ [2] http://www.ithacahours.com/starterkit.html [3] http://www.ithacahours.com/otherhours.html -tomwsmf From tomwhore at slack.net Thu Apr 10 14:01:59 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Thu Apr 10 10:01:09 2003 Subject: WiFUD, the phrase that pays Message-ID: >From the always infromative boingboing.net ----------------------- By Cory Doctorow WiFUD: "security experts" report on the dangers of WiFi Amazing bogus WiFi "security" study: Z/Yen set up two wireless access points and monitored activity on them. They report that 25% of the connections were "deliberate" (which, I assume, means made through selecting the SSID instead of inadvertently associating with the network because your card was set to connect to the strongest available signal) and that 71% of the connected users sent email. Fair enough -- that sounds like the right kind of numbers for me. I know that my net-stumbling workflow consists of finding a network, fetching my mail, moving on, answering my mail, finding another network, downloading new mail and sending the reply email. But the amazing thing is what Z/Yen and its client, RSA conclude: that the 25% of the people who deliberately associated with the network were "malicious," and that the 71% who sent email were sending spam. This is such a transparently, deliberately (heh) stupid conclusion, it boggles the mind: how can "deliberate" equate to "malicious?" How can "sending email" equate to "sending spam?" We keep seeing this kind of WiFUD, and a lot of it comes from self-serving "security experts." These experts' motivation is rather transparent: if you are in the business of selling security, you require customers who feel insecure. WiFi, by dint of its novelty and popularity, is a predictable target for shrill security warnings and a healthy source of potential revenue. We can only hope that no one takes these dishonest conclusions at face value ---------------------------------------------------- From deafbox at hotmail.com Thu Apr 10 18:03:22 2003 From: deafbox at hotmail.com (Russell Turpin) Date: Thu Apr 10 10:02:36 2003 Subject: FairTax, doom, and net-net Message-ID: Tomwhore: >Does this cover EVERY transaction? If I were king, I would except transactions between individuals involving labor or consumer goods. My reasoning is that I don't want to create the need to account for stuff that currently isn't accounted. >Where I think this would be both great, from my viewpoint, and horrible, >from the tax collectors veiwpoint, would be in alternative exchange >mediums. Yeah, there is some nitty-gritty there. You didn't name the obvious biggie: stock options in companies that aren't yet public. But really, I don't think it would be that much of a problem. (a) In the case of a fungible intangible with current or future market value, such as stock options, the tax is paid in kind. An agency similar to the Resolution Trust Corporation is created to hold and sell such instruments at such time as they become liquid. (b) In the case of non-tangible items such as land swaps, either exempt such transactions from tax, or require tax to be paid on fair-market value. >Even casual bartering would be a great way to decrease you federal >transactional spending. Keep in mind that this is a tax that would have a low rate, say 3% or 4%. _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus From tomwhore at slack.net Thu Apr 10 14:29:51 2003 From: tomwhore at slack.net (Tom) Date: Thu Apr 10 10:29:08 2003 Subject: FairTax, doom, and net-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Russell Turpin wrote: --]Keep in mind that this is a tax that would --]have a low rate, say 3% or 4%. --] Here in the great state of Oregon (waits for the cheap pop) we dont have to figure in any sales tax when we purcahase stuffs. Zero, zipo, nada. Any mathematical figuring other than zero will probably cause cranial ruptures in most of the non urban areas. The Oregon <>Washington shuffle is a regional dance that many people take very very seriously. Since Oregon has no sales tax and Washington has no income tax folks actualy degrade themselves to live in places like Vancouever (is to portland as jersery city is to new york city) and Camas (is to portland as elizabeth was to newyorkcity before the epa beat on them and even as far back as my preexiles days 5 years ago still smelled like the unwashed nethers of a million aged venessa del rios after a gang bang with all both sides of the house) They live in the godfrosaken burbs and shop across the river, and I mean a mere feet across the river, at jantzen beach or the nearest costco by the airport, also right across the river all so they can keep the tax drain low. Of course this has spurned Enforcement efforts, cops and taxmilita staked out at the two, and only two , bridges between Portland and Vancouer, to snag folks exhibitng conspicuous consumptive behaviors such as a flat bed crammed with a new 52'tv, a years worth of food and several hundred Walmart bags. Of course the flow goes the other way for things like gas, where its more expensive in Portland due to the "Your too dumb to pump your own gas gooberhead" and lower in Vancouever. hence last weekened before we aimed our Vandaminator [1] towards the coast we gased up across the river. Folks will go that extra mile to save that extra cent. As such I can imagine a world with Tax Enforcement Patrols on the look out for non registered exchanges. Oy vey. I mean lets face it, the IRS will have to retool somehow to make paying the lumps not seems so ridiculous. [1] http://wsmf.org/pictures/2003/040503-AstoriaWeekendAdventure/5-EcolaPicnoc/jpg_dscf0079.htm -tomwsmf From dl at silcom.com Thu Apr 10 12:24:14 2003 From: dl at silcom.com (Dave Long) Date: Thu Apr 10 11:17:44 2003 Subject: flat taxes In-Reply-To: Message from fork-request@xent.com of "Wed, 09 Apr 2003 22:55:17 PDT." <20030410055517.6075815DC332@xent.com> Message-ID: <200304101824.LAA11991@maltesecat> Here are my current guesses for various federal income tax neutral "flat" taxes: $3333 per head $9000 per household 15% of expenditure ?% of income (are these similar? what's the national savings rate?) 2.5% of wealth Are there better reasons for supporting one of these over another (or the status quo) than looking at one's own household size, wealth, and income, and then voting to have someone else foot the bill? -Dave (50% of $2T federal revenue, 300m pop., 110m households $40T net wealth) An older chart, from "FICA/Medicare" effective cumulative income tax percentage ----------- ---------- none 23 under 5 38 under 10 67 under 15 89 under 20 97 under 25 99 under 30 100 under 35 100 under 40 100 From jamesr at best.com Thu Apr 10 12:30:12 2003 From: jamesr at best.com (James Rogers) Date: Thu Apr 10 11:29:34 2003 Subject: FairTax, doom, and net-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <002d01c2ff8f$3abbd630$f200000a@avalon> From: Russell Turpin > Yeah, there is some nitty-gritty there. You > didn't name the obvious biggie: stock options > in companies that aren't yet public. But > really, I don't think it would be that much > of a problem. (a) In the case of a fungible > intangible with current or future market > value, such as stock options, the tax is paid > in kind. An agency similar to the Resolution > Trust Corporation is created to hold and sell > such instruments at such time as they become > liquid. Employee stock options are a problem in no small part because of how the SEC structures and regulates securities. I think the problem could largely be fixed by a simple SEC rule change. Specifically, eliminating the "qualified investor" rule or greatly relaxing the restrictions. The existing rules actually break the standard models of financial theory for these instruments and in a sense trap the investor in ESOs because the current regulations essentially prevent savvy investor behavior for these "non-securities". A preferable model would be treat employee stock options more like warrants, which is essentially what they are, except that warrants are securities and therefore have a qualified investor restriction. Unlike employee stock options, warrants don't have to be monetized to be "securitized" and behave essentially like marketable call options with very long expiration periods. The only tweak would be to defer the granting tax hit until the security had been sold or exercised. Additionally, because warrants are securities they have always immediately shown up in the corporate bottom-line, without the monkey business that has surrounded option accounting. Financial theory generally states that it is suboptimal to exercise options early, but the perverse arrangement of the ESOs not only encourages this behavior but aggravates the risks. By making ESOs have most of the essential properties of stock warrants, I think you could clean up the vast majority of the tax and accounting problems surrounding them. Cheers, -James Rogers jamesr@best.com From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 14:39:15 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 11:38:40 2003 Subject: FairTax: RTFM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thursday, Apr 10, 2003, at 11:07 US/Central, Russell Turpin wrote: > Again, I think this confuses marginal and > effective rate. Most people who are in the 20% > bracket have an effective tax rate quite a bit > below 20%. While I'm sensitive to the difference between marginal and effective tax rates, this is overstating the case. There can be a big difference between them --- but very few people in this country who pay taxes at all pay an *effective* tax rate near 4-5%, as you assert. Furthermore, you can misdirect the attention all you want over that direction, Russell, but the real juicy part of FairTax is in what it gets rid of and the impact that has. "The FairTax is a consumption tax designed to replace the entire federal income tax system, including personal, payroll, corporate, self-employment, capital gains, gift, and inheritance taxes." Think about that. It's LUDICROUS to assert that the actual aggregate tax rate on persons living in this country is in the 3-5% range. The aggregate tax rate for most people in this country, when all federal taxes and direct / indirect costs are figured in, is estimated to be significantly higher than even the marginal rate for any given individual. Rather than attempt (and fail) to reconstruct the full breadth and depth of analysis that is readily available about the FairTax proposal, I'm going to sign off on batting down with second-hand arguments every non-novel objection that's being raised. My summary of the proposal will never be as detailed or accurate nor my argument as clear as that provided by the framers of the proposal and other analysts who have looked at it. Given that, I urge to to ***RTFM*** then come back here with any stunning and novel insights you might have based on what it actually says. Every objection you've raised is dealt with in the various documents. (Bear in mind, this proposal's been floating around for several years, and has been subjected to much more rigorous argument than we're ever going to give it. From a "legislative natural selection" perspective, it's holding its own.) Again, I particularly recommend a handful of these: * Average Americans - http://www.fairtax.org/pdfs/averageamericans.pdf * Stable Government Revenue - http://www.fairtax.org/pdfs/stable%20government%20revenue.pdf * Wages - http://www.fairtax.org/pdfs/wages.pdf * FairTax vs. The Current System - http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/pdf/taxreform.pdf * Revenue Neutrality - http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/pdf/money_neutral.pdf jb From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 14:44:56 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 11:44:23 2003 Subject: FairTax, doom, and net-net In-Reply-To: <002d01c2ff8f$3abbd630$f200000a@avalon> Message-ID: <8676F100-6B84-11D7-88EA-00039366B36A@deepfile.com> James, for one I totally agree with you. Another particularly nasty bit of SEC madness is Rule 144. Another nasty bit of IRS madness is AMT. These things can combine in extremely unholy ways. ;-) :-) All in all, we'd be better off if *either* the IRS just gave up on trying to collect on non-real gains, *OR* if the IRS would drop the whole silly "qualified investor" nonsense. It's just more BS paternal gov't crap, protecting people from themselves... $0.02, jb From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 14:55:06 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 11:54:27 2003 Subject: Isn't it funny... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: That Woody sees FairTax as some kind of socialist ploy or leftist attempt to suck the gov't teat, while Russell apparently views it as a conservative conspiracy to screw the poor even more. Russell, Woody. Woody, Russell. Discuss. This should be entertaining. jb PS - this only underscores how useless the whole notion of a 1D political continuum really is... "Conservative," "liberal" --- whatever. From jamesr at best.com Thu Apr 10 13:07:57 2003 From: jamesr at best.com (James Rogers) Date: Thu Apr 10 12:07:05 2003 Subject: Congressman defends bill to require CDMA in Iraq In-Reply-To: <87y92jhr86.fsf@mulligatwani.msrl.com> Message-ID: <002f01c2ff94$7fd28160$f200000a@avalon> From: Michael Shields [mailto:shields@msrl.com] > > It's not clear to me that the CDMA->CDMA2000 transition would > really be much less expensive than the GSM->CDMA2000 or > GSM->W-CDMA transitions. I don't disagree at all. All the upgrade paths will probably be equally expensive because they all essentially require a rebuild of the infrastructure for all intents and purposes. I don't have a horse in this race because, quite frankly, I have zero interest in it. I do think the case for W-CDMA is totally contrived and more a case of "Not Invented Here" on the part of the Europeans (who didn't want to admit that CDMA was a better technology in the first place). They would probably be better off just using CDMA2000/3G and calling it a day. The European telecom industry doesn't like Qualcomm, but over time they have had to grudgingly admit that Qualcomm had it right and the relationship is pretty adversarial. > Well, this is a matter of opinion. I am extremely > unimpressed with current CDMA phones, especially since > Motorola's new models are actually larger and heavier than > the previous generation (V8160). My new Ericsson T600 > (800/1800/1900 GSM) is far superior. *Shrug*. Motorola phones have generally sucked for a long time. My Ericsson GSM phones were always better than my Motorola GSM phones. Both the Europeans and Japanese know how to make better phones than Motorola in my opinion. > I don't agree with you, but for the sake of argument let's > say regional standardization is enough. Iraq is about the > size of California, and GSM is used by all of its neighbors. > Do you think that is a large enough region? How long will all of its neighbors be using GSM? If Europe, North America, and parts of Asia migrate to CDMA in the relative short-term, I'm not sure that this has advantages other than in the short-term. By the time the infrastructure actually gets built, important sections of the world will be well on their way to a CDMA conversion. This is what I'm concerned about. If you are going to build a new network from scratch, CDMA2000 or W-CDMA would be the smart choices. Of those, CDMA2000 is probably the better bet at this point in time. I just don't think it is a particularly wise idea to invest in an inferior technology merely for the sake of being backwardly compatible with a technology that nobody in the first-world plans on deploying any more. Five years ago GSM would have been a good choice for building a new network, but not today. Cheers, -James Rogers jamesr@best.com From deafbox at hotmail.com Thu Apr 10 20:42:54 2003 From: deafbox at hotmail.com (Russell Turpin) Date: Thu Apr 10 12:42:06 2003 Subject: FairTax: RTFM Message-ID: Jeff Bone: >Every objection you've raised is dealt with in the various documents. .. I didn't see any discussion of the international ramifications. If I missed it, please let me know where. I want to know if I have to pay that 23% on medicines from Canadian pharmacies, and how that will be collected. Beyond that, I hope the idea gets traction. It will be tweaked, and I don't believe its numbers, but as you point out, anything is better than an income tax. The big risk is that we'll end up with both a national sales tax AND an income tax. I'd like to see any tax revision scheme get coupled to Congress initiating a repeal of the 16th amendment. The "fair" tax would be an especially good change for me. Since my consumption after rent is well below the rebate level, I'll get a subsidy, as will everyone who lives modestly. How can I complain? _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus From deafbox at hotmail.com Thu Apr 10 21:15:24 2003 From: deafbox at hotmail.com (Russell Turpin) Date: Thu Apr 10 13:14:35 2003 Subject: Isn't it funny... Message-ID: >Russell apparently views it as a conservative conspiracy to screw the poor >even more. Not quite. I'm convinced some group will pay. To achieve revenue neutrality, every dollar someone saves someone else pays. Since they also propose to eliminate the corporate income tax, consumers have to take up that burden also. So for whom does the tax burden increase? They hint it will be retirees. Who pays an effective income tax rate in the low single digits, Jeff? It's not a working person, since social security is 7%, but a retiree with moderate income from investments. This is a tax that might split the AARP. Those with high tax rates will support it, while those with low tax rates will fear it. The politics of that gets interesting. Related to this, there is a social security issue that must be faced by any proposal to eliminate the social security tax, to wit: how to determine who receives social security, and to what degree. Right now, that is determined (though not in any sensible fashion) by how long and how much one has paid into the system. Without that record, what determines benefits? Do we eliminate social security altogether? Do we make it a fixed stipend? And how do we handle people who are 55 and 60, and planning on their payment per the old rules? This is really a mess, for which we should all curse the New Dealers. I'm all for cutting this Stygian knot with a broad axe. But not for nothing is it called the third rail of politics. BTW, I realized on second reading that the fair tax applies to new cars and new homes. That explains where they think some of the money will come from. This aspect of the proposal will have every real estate developer screaming bloody murder. I'm not sure the "new" distinction makes sense on real property and capital items. If you build a $80K house on a $100K lot, how much gets taxed? What if I just add a $80K wing onto a $20K structure? Does it depend on how the deal is structured, and if so, did they assume that deals wouldn't be structured purposely to minimize that hit? How much would the rate be lowered if the base is expanded to include ALL real estate transactions? (Ah, but they excluded existing real estate as a political bone to existing home-owners. Maybe these folks are savvy enough to get this through. Split the AARP, hit new home buyers who typically are hit hard by income tax, throw a bone to existing home-owners..) _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus From jm at jmason.org Thu Apr 10 14:16:18 2003 From: jm at jmason.org (Justin Mason) Date: Thu Apr 10 13:16:26 2003 Subject: Congressman defends bill to require CDMA in Iraq In-Reply-To: Message from "James Rogers" <002f01c2ff94$7fd28160$f200000a@avalon> Message-ID: <20030410201623.AF29F8BD2A@localhost.jmason.org> James Rogers said: > From: Michael Shields [mailto:shields@msrl.com] > > Well, this is a matter of opinion. I am extremely > > unimpressed with current CDMA phones, especially since > > Motorola's new models are actually larger and heavier than > > the previous generation (V8160). My new Ericsson T600 > > (800/1800/1900 GSM) is far superior. > > *Shrug*. Motorola phones have generally sucked for a long time. My > Ericsson GSM phones were always better than my Motorola GSM phones. Both > the Europeans and Japanese know how to make better phones than Motorola in > my opinion. Well, I can agree on that at least. Motorola == crud. ;) --j. From rah at shipwright.com Thu Apr 10 17:09:32 2003 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Thu Apr 10 13:29:28 2003 Subject: Majority Leader Tom Delay Supports the FairTax! In-Reply-To: <200304100727.h3A7R5a6004949@pollux.chuck> References: <200304100727.h3A7R5a6004949@pollux.chuck> Message-ID: At 3:27 AM -0400 4/10/03, Woodchuck wrote: > Out of delicacy, I will refer to you as Ms Bone, it being >customary, when in doubt, to use the higher-ranking title. It is >more euphonious as well. I swear to god, boys and girls, I haven't had this much fun reading a mail list since the hogs ate my little brother. Lizard, thy name is Woodchuck. Rock on... Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From bill_clark at flashmail.com Thu Apr 10 15:35:30 2003 From: bill_clark at flashmail.com (Bill Clark) Date: Thu Apr 10 14:27:39 2003 Subject: something funny Message-ID: <3e95e3a2.1c2.0@flashmail.com> had a good chuckle from this one LOL http://www.funforwards.com/flash/september02/saddam.swf Bill _______________________________________________________________ Get Your FREE FlashMail Address now at http://www.flashmail.com It's Free, Easy, & Fun !!! From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 17:45:52 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 14:45:11 2003 Subject: FairTax: RTFM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I am not the authoritative source of information about FairTax, Russell. I cannot off-hand answer your 9,000,000 questions, and I refuse to play your "running to the edge" games --- it's just a way of maintaining status quo while adopting a facade of "but no, really, I'm not change- and risk-averse, I just have questions." Read the docs. Read the bill. Convince yourself one way or the other. If you have questions, use the contact information on the site. If you have serious critiques based on what's actually there, rather than machine-gun and ominous-sounding questions about what you haven't taken the time to find out, please share them. jb From bill at whump.com Thu Apr 10 16:36:58 2003 From: bill at whump.com (Bill Humphries) Date: Thu Apr 10 15:35:10 2003 Subject: The Americans are coming! Throw Grandma in the Trunk. Message-ID: A rather ignominious exit from Baghdad. http://nytimes.com/slideshow/2003/04/09/international/09cnd-bagh- slideshow_8.html -- whump From deafbox at hotmail.com Fri Apr 11 00:17:50 2003 From: deafbox at hotmail.com (Russell Turpin) Date: Thu Apr 10 16:17:03 2003 Subject: FairTax -- apology Message-ID: Jeff Bone: >I am not the authoritative source of information about FairTax .. OK. I apologize for distracting from the news you posted, by sniping at the details of the proposed tax. The current bill has some answers to my questions (e.g., exports are not taxed, SS income is still recorded, imports are meant to be taxed but the mechanism for collection is fuzzy). Undoubtedly it would get much revised before anything like it becomes law. I wish I knew what to make of the news. If Tom DeLay's support is really going to get this bill to the point where it receives significant legislative attention, that's great news. Practically, anything that gets rid of the income tax would be a great thing, even if it needs some tuning later. If his support is more in the way of politics, the news is not quite as exciting. Keep us alerted, Jeff. _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From djv at bedford.net Thu Apr 10 20:38:29 2003 From: djv at bedford.net (Woodchuck) Date: Thu Apr 10 16:40:46 2003 Subject: Isn't it funny... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Jeff Bone wrote: > > That Woody sees FairTax as some kind of socialist ploy or leftist > attempt to suck the gov't teat, while Russell apparently views it as a > conservative conspiracy to screw the poor even more. Well, you've joined Barerra in the act of plonking me, so it's not entertaining at least to you. You will miss at least parts of my wonderful, cuddly wit. I see FairTax as a vehicle for more state, more taxes, more tax police. I see these things in its details, its sins of omission and commision, as revealed in the bill itself, not in the advocacy stuff on the "freetaxvolunteer.org" website. Since the primary material -- the text of the bill -- is available, I believe the spirit of this list coerces if not demands that it take precedence over secondary material. > Russell, Woody. Woody, Russell. Discuss. This should be entertaining. Its (the bill's) first glaring omission is that it repeals only the IRS enabling laws. Instead, FairTax should make its imposition contingent on repeal of the Income Tax admendment; my experience is that the government will return to the income tax at some later date if it can get away with it. The repealing amendment should also abolish inheritance taxes and one troubling thing: it should (must?) grant the feds the power to tax the individual states and local governments. Yup. FairTax the Bill applies its tax to consumption by all levels of government. This is a sly way to raise taxes from those who, supposedly, it purports to gift with rebates. Since state governments do not create wealth, this tax will be paid for from the state government's usual source: its own sales taxes (non rebated), income taxes (state income taxes stay in place, and many are flat-rate or regressive) and property taxes. I believe and offer without supporting URL that roughly half of governmental activity is now state-local, and that constitutes a vast reservoir of taxing opportunity, now tapped at 25% by the Feds. Notice how this allows a "secret backdoor" for income taxing to continue, using the states, (or as they will become and should be called, "provinces") to collect it. Another point that the advocacy site glosses over is that this tax will be collected by, when states have them, the existing state sales tax mechanism, and paid over to the feds. I suspect (but cannot demonstrate) that part of the mass savings alleged for this tax is due to funny business about the costs of collection. I can only suppose that the authors of FairTax either hate the people, or have no experience with a state-run sales-tax bureacracy (California Franchise Tax Board is one, no?). Mr Turpin (I hope you are a man and not offended) will find his questions about imports and exports (a new system of certificates), and Mr Whore (who seems incapable of offense) will find questions about barter and hobby-dodges answered in the text of the bill itself. Much of it seems to be conceptually modelled on the infamous "Gun Control Act of 1968", creating all manner of "registered" importers and "registered" exporters, and "registered" households, one step from licensing. Surely we couldn't allow, say, a convicted felon, or someone who has yelled at his wife, from being a registered importer of Canadian tea cozies, to be entrusted with the assessment of The Tax? Yes, licensing will quickly follow. I can see the future. Just to rub it in, FairTax the Bill keeps social security cooking, *including the reporting of income*. Just now it is funded differently. Perhaps this is the whole point? It is a sort of selling point to some partisans. And Mr Bone's assertion of *VOLUNTARY* is largely bogus. The same degree of *VOLUNTARISM* would be present by creating, under the existing income tax, a no-withdrawal-penalty, unlimited-contribution, self-directed savings plan, and abolishing the death tax. It's just another "Single Tax" snake-oil, like fiat currency or free silver coinage. The property taxes just mentioned are a vestige of one of these snake-oil panaceas, the old "Single Land Tax". Mumble something about David Ricardo here. The "Income Tax" was supposed to cure everything, too. > jb > > PS - this only underscores how useless the whole notion of a 1D > political continuum really is... "Conservative," "liberal" --- > whatever. Conservative, liberal, and varmints shot and thrown in the killfile for using "hir" sarcastically. D. -- "If troops are attacking cities, their strength will be exhausted." -- Sun Tzu From djv at bedford.net Thu Apr 10 20:50:51 2003 From: djv at bedford.net (Woodchuck) Date: Thu Apr 10 16:59:22 2003 Subject: FairTax -- apology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Russell Turpin wrote: > I wish I knew what to make of the news. If Tom > DeLay's support is really going to get this bill to > the point where it receives significant legislative > attention, that's great news. Practically, anything > that gets rid of the income tax would be a great > thing, even if it needs some tuning later. If his > support is more in the way of politics, the news is > not quite as exciting. Keep us alerted, Jeff. It has not yet been referred to committee. This is not a kiss of death, but it is not exactly on a fast track, unlike more needed legislation like the Patriot Act and relief for the dental floss ranchers and subsidies for inefficient steel mills. I would say that chances for any sort of significant tax reform is zero... there's a war on. This is post 9/11. We have to all grin and bear it. Criticism of the income tax is unAmerican... D. -- "If troops are attacking cities, their strength will be exhausted." -- Sun Tzu From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 20:15:50 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 17:15:20 2003 Subject: Majority Leader Tom Delay Supports the FairTax! In-Reply-To: <200304102256.h3AMutEE009772@pollux.chuck> Message-ID: On Thursday, Apr 10, 2003, at 17:56 US/Central, Woodchuck wrote: > No, I didn't base that on hir flaws of factuality. I did not know > hir sex, so accorded hir the honor of the higher title. NB for list: I have now kill-filed this idjut. As a rule --- call it "Bone's Rule," similar to "Godwin's Law" --- I refuse to have a serious conversation with somebody who insists on using these stupid gender-neutral pronouns. In my experience and to a person, folks who do this have serious, serious issues of disconnect w/ reality. And there's just no margin in that beyond, oh, say a day of tedious fun. So it's been fun, but I've pulled the plug on Woody here... You mailboxes will not suffer from my tedious cat-and-mouse games with this fool any longer. To Woody's credit, I think that's a record: 1 day from "intro" to kill file. (I do, however, suspect that Woody is in fact somebody who's been around these parts before, and I have a few suspicions who, too...) jb From joe at barrera.org Thu Apr 10 18:26:15 2003 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S Barrera III) Date: Thu Apr 10 17:25:28 2003 Subject: Majority Leader Tom Delay Supports the FairTax! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E960BA7.8000703@barrera.org> Jeff Bone wrote: > fool any longer. To Woody's credit, I think that's a record: 1 > day from "intro" to kill file. (I do, however, suspect that Woody Me too, I think. > jb jb iii From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 20:58:33 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 17:57:52 2003 Subject: FairTax -- apology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thursday, Apr 10, 2003, at 18:17 US/Central, Russell Turpin wrote: > Jeff Bone: >> I am not the authoritative source of information about FairTax .. > > OK. I apologize Russell, no apology necessary. If I trounced you a bit hard about this, *my* apologies are in order --- chalk it up to the tediousness of my other-side convo w/ this "Woody" person. Of course any debate on this is in order --- but let's try to keep the debate novel and issue-driven, rather than exploratory and substituting for available materials. I'm sure all of us are busy enough that that's a good idea... Fyi, jb From jbone at deepfile.com Thu Apr 10 23:02:26 2003 From: jbone at deepfile.com (Jeff Bone) Date: Thu Apr 10 20:01:45 2003 Subject: [STORK?] More RIAA madne